United States v. Kenwaniee Tate

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6523 Doc: 6 Filed: 10/21/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6523

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KENWANIEE VONTORIAN TATE, a/k/a Keno,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. David C. Keesler, Magistrate Judge. (3:15-cr-00265-RJC-DCK-1)

Submitted: October 16, 2025 Decided: October 21, 2025

Before KING, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenwaniee Vontorian Tate, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-6523 Doc: 6 Filed: 10/21/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Kenwaniee Vontorian Tate seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s postjudgment

order denying as moot Tate’s motion to compel his former attorney to return his case file.

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 order on appeal is not an

appealable final order. See United States v. Henson, 127 F.4th 1054, 1056 (7th Cir. 2025)

(“Magistrate judges may issue final decisions only if authorized to do so.”); see id. at 1056-

57 (dismissing appeal from magistrate judge’s order for lack of jurisdiction); see also

Estate of Conners v. O’Connor, 6 F.3d 656, 659 (9th Cir. 1993) (recognizing that “[28

U.S.C. §] 636(b)(1) does not authorize a magistrate [judge] to enter a post-judgment order,”

and collecting cases).

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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED