Alfonso-Jorrin v. Congress of the United States

Fourth Circuit

Alfonso-Jorrin v. Congress of the United States

109 F. App'x 557

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 16, 2004

DocketNo. 04-7022

StatusPublished

This text of 109 F. App'x 557 (Alfonso-Jorrin v. Congress of the United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alfonso-Jorrin v. Congress of the United States, 109 F. App'x 557 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Eusebio Alfonso-Jorrin seeks to appeal the district court’s order placing his petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), in abeyance pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Benitez v. Wallis, 337 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir.2003), cert. granted, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 1143, 157 L.Ed.2d 966 (2004). 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 Alfonso-Jorrin 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Eusebio Alfonso-Jorrin seeks to appeal the district court’s order placing his petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), in abeyance pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Benitez v. Wallis, 337 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir.2003), cert. granted, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 1143, 157 L.Ed.2d 966 (2004). 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 Alfonso-Jorrin 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 F. App'x 557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alfonso-jorrin-v-congress-of-the-united-states-ca4-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack