Court Opinion

ID: 9951461
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-16 21:00:42.361402+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:40:38.158729
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1106      Doc: 20         Filed: 03/15/2024     Pg: 1 of 3

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 24-1106

        SIDDHANTH SHARMA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        DEMETRIUS A. CLARK; FELIX TAYLOR; DEAN HEFFERNAN;
        CHRISTOPHER ADAMS; TONY BETHEA; CHRISTOPHER QUICK; BRIAN
        KERSTETTER; STEPHEN JACOBS,

                             Defendants - Appellees,

                                               No. 24-1107

        SIDDHANTH SHARMA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        DEMETRIUS A. CLARK; FELIX TAYLOR; DEAN HEFFERNAN;
        CHRISTOPHER ADAMS; TONY BETHEA; CHRISTOPHER QUICK; BRIAN
        KERSTETTER; STEPHEN JACOBS,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:21-ct-03311-M)
USCA4 Appeal: 24-1106      Doc: 20         Filed: 03/15/2024    Pg: 2 of 3

        Submitted: March 12, 2024                                         Decided: March 15, 2024

        Before GREGORY, RICHARDSON, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Siddhanth Sharma, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 24-1106         Doc: 20      Filed: 03/15/2024      Pg: 3 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Siddhanth Sharma seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motions to

        add additional parties and to reopen discovery in his pending civil action. 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 orders Sharma seeks to appeal are neither final

        orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we grant Sharma’s

        motion to amend, deny his motion for a stay, and dismiss these appeals 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

                                                     3