Bilal v. Currie

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: September 10, 2002
• Docket: 02-6848
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6848

SHATEEK AMIN BILAL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GEORGE CURRIE, Superintendent; LAWRENCE SOLOMON, Assistant Superintendent; RICKY DUKE, Assistant Superintendent; JEANNIE LANCASTER; HAROLD PERSON; MICHAEL MUNNS; LIEUTENANT RYAN; SERGEANT SMITH; LIEUTENANT VANBUREN; SERGEANT OAKES; GUARD NORWOOD; GUARD IRBY; GUARD WILLIAMS; GUARD MAGNUM; GUARD JONES; GUARD MCMILLION; GUARD CORDELL; DAVID CARROLL, Sergeant; SERGEANT WESLEY; SERGEANT SMITH,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-02-9-5-H)

Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 10, 2002

Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shateek Amin Bilal, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Shateek Amin Bilal appeals the district court’s order denying

his motion for reconsideration of a previous order that dismissed

some, but not all, of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) claims as

frivolous. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because

the order is not appealable. 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 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor

an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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