Court Opinion

ID: 9412230
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-28 21:01:52.907242+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:33.520618
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7169      Doc: 15         Filed: 07/27/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-7169

        RICARDO EDWIN LANIER,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        J. BURNS, Sheriff Officer, Henderson County Sheriff’s Office; Z. CAPPS, Sheriff
        Officer, Henderson County Sheriff’s Office,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:22-cv-00078-MR)

        Submitted: July 25, 2023                                          Decided: July 27, 2023

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

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Ricardo Edwin Lanier, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7169       Doc: 15         Filed: 07/27/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Ricardo Edwin Lanier seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing all of

        his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims except for his excessive force claim, which the court allowed

        to proceed, and denying his requests for reconsideration of the dismissal order. He also

        seeks to appeal the district court’s subsequent orders denying his motion to change venue

        because of the district court judge’s alleged bias and denying various types of relief he

        requested in several letters to the court. 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 Lanier seeks to appeal are neither final nor appealable interlocutory or collateral

        orders. 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