Court Opinion

ID: 9412361
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-29 21:00:50.640417+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:10.409939
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1514      Doc: 6         Filed: 07/28/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-1514

        RONALD SATISH EMRIT,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        SABINE AISHA JULES,

                             Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Kimberly Anne Swank, Magistrate Judge. (5:23-cv-00179-FL)

        Submitted: July 25, 2023                                            Decided: July 28, 2023

        Before WYNN and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Ronald Satish Emrit, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1514      Doc: 6         Filed: 07/28/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Ronald Satish Emrit seeks to appeal from the magistrate judge’s report and

        recommendation. 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

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

        order. Haney v. Addison, 175 F.3d 1217, 1219 (10th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we 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

                                                     2