Court Opinion

ID: 8425859
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-04 02:06:58.805962+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:48:30.735364
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
Hugh Gregory Turbeville seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss one of the ten named Defendants in Turbeville’s civil action. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); 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 Turbeville seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED