Court Opinion

ID: 9912629
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-22 21:00:40.127948+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:01:19.903715
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1956      Doc: 12         Filed: 12/21/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1956

        MICHAEL QUIST,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY FOUNDATION,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:23-cv-00487-CMH-IDD)

        Submitted: December 19, 2023                                Decided: December 21, 2023

        Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Michael Quist, Appellant Pro Se. Alexander Phillip Faig, MOORE, CHRISTOFF &
        SIDDIQUI, PLLC, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1956      Doc: 12          Filed: 12/21/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Michael Quist seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for

        failure to state a claim, denying his motion for sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b), and

        denying his remaining motions as moot. 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 Quist seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable

        interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction

        and deny Quist’s motion to amend the record. 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