Skip to main content

MCNEILL v. Katy Poole, Superintendent; George Solomon, Director of Prisons; Shannon Maples, Unit Manager; George S. Warren; William Bullard, Assistant Superintendent; Paul Taylor, Assistant Superintendent; Sgt. Johnston; Doctor Locklear-Jones; Shaquanna M. Wall, Defendants. (2019)

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

James C. MCNEILL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Patricia ANDERSON, Defendant - Appellee, Katy Poole, Superintendent; George Solomon, Director of Prisons; Shannon Maples, Unit Manager; George S. Warren; William Bullard, Assistant Superintendent; Paul Taylor, Assistant Superintendent; Sgt. Johnston; Doctor Locklear-Jones; Shaquanna M. Wall, Defendants.

No. 19-6132

Decided: May 29, 2019

Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. James C. McNeill, Appellant Pro Se.

James C. McNeill seeks to appeal the district court’s amended judgment adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying McNeill’s motion for entry of default judgment and granting Patricia Anderson’s motion to remove default. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-45, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The amended judgment McNeill seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.* 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

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   An order denying a preliminary injunction is immediately appealable. 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) (2012); see Dewhurst v. Cent. Aluminum Co., 649 F.3d 287, 290 (4th Cir. 2011). Our review of McNeill’s notice of appeal and informal brief lead us to conclude that he does not seek to appeal the portion of the district court’s amended judgment denying a preliminary injunction. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief”).

PER CURIAM:

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Copied to clipboard