Belt v. United States
This text of Belt v. United States (Belt v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 14-5114 Document: 3 Page: 1 Filed: 07/30/2014
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________
TARIQ BELT, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. ______________________
2014-5114 ______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:10-cv-00466-NBF, Judge Nancy B. Fire- stone. ______________________
PER CURIAM. ORDER The court directs Tariq Belt to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The order of the Court of Federal Claims that Mr. Belt has appealed returned his complaint but granted leave to file a complaint that conformed to the court’s rules. Ordinarily, this court is authorized to review only a “final decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims.” 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(3). While there are excep- Case: 14-5114 Document: 3 Page: 2 Filed: 07/30/2014
tions to this general rule, it does not appear that the order in question falls within any of those exceptions. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) Belt is directed to show cause within 21 days from the date of this order why his appeal should not be dis- missed for lack of jurisdiction. The appellee may also respond within that time. (2) Mr. Belt’s motion for an extension of time is denied as moot. The briefing schedule is stayed.
FOR THE COURT
/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court s24
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Belt v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/belt-v-united-states-cafc-2014.