Notice: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 States that Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for Establishing Res Judicata, Estoppel, or the Law of the Case and Requires Service of Copies of Cited Unpublished Dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Jesse J. Pritchard, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles E. Thompson, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Respondents-Appellees., 914 F.2d 1492 (4th Cir. 1990)

Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (September 27, 1990)

Docket number: 90-6352
Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/37330754
Id. vLex: VLEX-37330754

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

Text:

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, United States Magistrate. (CA-90-150-R)

Jesse J. Pritchard, Jr., appellant pro se.

Robert Quentin Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Va., for appellees.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before SPROUSE and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Jesse J. Pritchard, Jr. appeals the magistrate's order that Pritchard amend his petition to delete unexhausted claims or face dismissal (without prejudice) of both his exhausted and unexhausted claims. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Under 28 U.S.C. Sec . 1291 this Court has jurisdiction over appeals from final orders. A final order is one which disposes of all issues in dispute as to all parties. It "ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment." Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945).

As the order appealed from is not a final order, it is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. Sec . 1291. The district court has not directed entry of final judgment as to particular claims or parties under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b), nor is the order appealable under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. Sec . 1292. Finally, the order is not appealable as a collateral order under Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949).

Finding no basis for appellate jurisdiction, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and 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.

Other documents:
50 cfr 23.55 - gray wolf (canis lupus). | United States of America Plaintiff-Appellee v Jerry Bradford Cox Defendant-Appellant United States of America Plaintiff-Appellee v Doss Foreman Jr. Defendant-Appelle... | Anthony Rozelle Banks Petitioner-Appellee v Dan M Reynolds Warden Oklahoma State Penitentiary Mcalester Oklahoma Susan B Loving Att... | 22 usc 968 - sec. 968. repealed. pub. l. 96-465, title ii, sec. 2205(1), oct. 17, 1980, 94 stat. 2159 | Un atractivo sustituto para el Shuma | ley 37 acciones posesorias | apunalado al tratar de evitar un atraco | ORDENANÇA MUNICIPAL DE CIRCULACIÓ DE VIANANTS I VEHICLES DE L AJUNTAMENT DE MURO El Ple de l Ajuntament en sessió ordinària celebrada el dia 29 de maig de 2008 ha acorda... | RESOLUCIO PTO/3031/2006 de 14 de setembre sobre la segona convocatoria de les proves per obtenir els certificats de capacitacio... | rc b5-0262/2002 cumbre mundial sobre la alimentacion fao enmienda 1 | Rassas v Commissioner of Internal Revenue. 196 F.2d 611 7th Cir 1952 | resolucio de 26 de juliol de 2006, de convocatòria de concurs oposició per a ...