Latia Thompson-Mckoy v. UDR, Incorporated

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: October 6, 2025
• Docket: 25-1599
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1599 Doc: 23 Filed: 10/06/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-1599

LATIA THOMPSON-MCKOY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UDR, INCORPORATED; JOSEPH D. FISHER, Chief Financial Officer/President; BRENNA COSTNER, UDR, Inc. Business Manager,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Julie R. Rubin, District Judge. (1:25-cv-00611-JRR)

Submitted: August 14, 2025 Decided: October 6, 2025

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

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Latia Thompson-Mckoy, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Andrew Johnston, Darcy Osta, ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT, LLC, Washington, D.C., for Appellees Fisher and Costner.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1599 Doc: 23 Filed: 10/06/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Latia Thompson-Mckoy seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying her initial

and first renewed requests for a temporary restraining order. 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). The orders Thompson-Mckoy seeks to appeal are

neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.* See Off. of Pers.

Mgmt. v. Am. Fed’n of Gov’t Emps., 473 U.S. 1301, 1303-05 (1985) (discussing

appealability of order denying temporary restraining order). Accordingly, we deny

Thompson-Mckoy’s pending motions, and 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED

* Because Thompson-Mckoy’s claims against the defendants are still pending in the district court, a final order has not yet been entered. See Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015) (discussing finality).