Case Name: Gary L. DeTEMPLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mark D. PANEPINTO, successor to United National Bank, successor to Fed One Bank doing business as Eastern Development Company; United National Bank; West Virginia Department of Tax and Revenue; B.K. Watts, Unit Manager, Internal Auditing Division, in his individual capacity; United States Department of Justice; Rita R. Valdrini, in her individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-06-13
Citations: 36 F. App'x 523
Docket Number: No. 01-2410
Parties: Gary L. DeTEMPLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mark D. PANEPINTO, successor to United National Bank, successor to Fed One Bank doing business as Eastern Development Company; United National Bank; West Virginia Department of Tax and Revenue; B.K. Watts, Unit Manager, Internal Auditing Division, in his individual capacity; United States Department of Justice; Rita R. Valdrini, in her individual capacity, Defendants-Appel-lees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 36
Pages: 523–524

Head Matter:
Gary L. DeTEMPLE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mark D. PANEPINTO, successor to United National Bank, successor to Fed One Bank doing business as Eastern Development Company; United National Bank; West Virginia Department of Tax and Revenue; B.K. Watts, Unit Manager, Internal Auditing Division, in his individual capacity; United States Department of Justice; Rita R. Valdrini, in her individual capacity, Defendants-Appel-lees.
No. 01-2410.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 31, 2002.
Decided June 13, 2002.
Gary L. DeTemple, Appellant Pro Se. Mark D. Panepinto, Wheeling, West Virginia; George James Anetakis, Weirton, West Virginia; William David Wilmoth, Steptoe & Johnson, Wheeling, West Virginia; Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Office of the United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WTDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Gary L. DeTemple appeals from the district court's order denying his Fed. R.Civ.P. 59 motion to vacate a prior order dismissing one of the named defendants in the underlying proceeding. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. In light of this disposition, we also deny DeTemple's motions for clarification, for production of documents, and for stay pending appeal, as well as United National Bank's motions to deny further extensions, to dismiss the case, and to strike DeTemple's informal brief and response to its motion to dismiss. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.