Robert Garrett, Jr. v. Aull ( 2019 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6796
ROBERT LOUIS GARRETT, JR., a/k/a Chubby, a/k/a Chubb, a/k/a Tru, a/k/a
Kweli, a/k/a Justice,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
AULL; BECKETT, JR.; T. ESTERLINE; JAMES PARRISH,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 19-6824
ROBERT LOUIS GARRETT, JR., a/k/a Chubby, a/k/a Chubb, a/k/a Tru, a/k/a
Kweli, a/k/a Justice,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
AULL; BECKETT, JR.; T. ESTERLINE; JAMES PARRISH,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock
Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge; Paige Jones Gossett, Magistrate
Judge. (0:18-cv-01418-CMC-PJG)
Submitted: October 15, 2019 Decided: October 17, 2019
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Louis Garrett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Robert Louis Garrett, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying his motion for a preliminary
injunction and denying his motion to alter or amend; the district court’s order affirming the
magistrate judge’s order and allowing Garrett until June 25, 2019, to file any motion to
amend or supplement his complaint; the magistrate judge’s order dismissing as moot
Garrett’s motion to compel and for sanctions, motion to stay, two motions to supplement
the motion to compel and for sanctions, and Defendants’ motion for extension of time; and
the magistrate judge’s order denying Garrett’s motions to appoint counsel. 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, 545-46 (1949). The denial of Garrett’s
motion for a preliminary injunction is an appealable interlocutory order. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292(a)(1). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the denial of the
preliminary injunction or motion to reconsider. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Garrett v. Aull, No. 0:18-cv-01418-CMC-PJG (D.S.C. Apr. 12,
2019 & May 30, 2019). The remaining three orders are neither final orders nor appealable
interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeals for
lack of jurisdiction.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
DISMISSED IN PART
3