Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-24-06724/USCOURTS-ca4-24-06724-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lieutenant Adlan
Appellee
Andrews
Appellee
Major Booker
Appellee
M. Clarke
Appellee
John Doe
Appellee
Jane Does
Appellee
John Does
Appellee
Gonzalez
Appellee
Tarra Johnson
Appellee
Gary Jones
Appellee
Mobley
Appellee
T. Rowley
Appellee
R. Vaughn
Appellee
James R. Vaughter
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6724

JAMES R. VAUGHTER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LIEUTENANT R. VAUGHN; SERGEANT ANDREWS; OFC. MOBLEY; 

LIEUTENANT ADLAN; JOHN DOE; JOHN DOES; JANE DOES; DR. M. 

CLARKE; JANE DOES, Medical Providers/Nurses; MAJOR BOOKER, Chief of 

Security at SFCC; GONZALEZ, Hearings Officer at SFCC; GARY JONES, Warden 

at SFCC; TARRA JOHNSON, Chief of Housing at SFCC; T. ROWLEY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Jamar Kentrell Walker, District Judge. (2:24-cv-00377-JKW-DEM)

Submitted: December 2, 2024 Decided: December 17, 2024

Before NIEMEYER, QUATTLEBAUM, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James R. Vaughter, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6724 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/17/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

James R. Vaughter seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for 

the appointment of counsel. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 

U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The 

order Vaughter seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or 

collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Vaughter’s request for counsel and dismiss the 

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6724 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/17/2024 Pg: 2 of 2