Court Opinion

ID: 9406519
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-30 21:01:26.935233+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:31.285432
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2189      Doc: 15         Filed: 06/29/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-2189

        MARIE THERESE ASSA’AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        JOHN W. KITTREDGE, solely officially as Acting SC Chief Justice in SC Appellate
        Case 2021-000815, and solely for declaratory and injunctive relief,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (3:22-cv-00923-TLW-SVH)

        Submitted: June 22, 2023                                          Decided: June 29, 2023

        Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2189      Doc: 15          Filed: 06/29/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas, MD, MPH, seeks to appeal the district court’s order

        accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny Assa’ad-Faltas’ motions for a

        temporary restraining order and for a stay of the district court proceedings. 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). Upon review, we conclude that the order Assa’ad-

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

        order. See, e.g., Drudge v. McKernon, 482 F.2d 1375, 1376 (4th Cir. 1973) (“We have

        been cited to no authority, and we are aware of none, that, as a general rule, the granting or

        denial of a motion for a temporary restraining order is an appealable order.”). Accordingly,

        we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny as moot Assa’ad-Faltas’ motion to

        require Appellee to respond to the informal brief and mediate the case. 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