United States v. Aldi Caban ( 2022 )

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6121 Doc: 10 Filed: 08/12/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-6121
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ALDI RAMON CABAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:06-cr-01208-BHH-5)
Submitted: August 5, 2022 Decided: August 12, 2022
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aldi Ramon Caban, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6121 Doc: 10 Filed: 08/12/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Aldi Ramon Caban seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for
compassionate release. 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).
“Ordinarily, a district court order is not final until it has resolved all claims as to all parties.”
Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Our review of the record reveals that the district court did not adjudicate the claims
raised in Caban’s motion for compassionate release. Id. at 696-97. Specifically, the court
did not address Caban’s assertion that he is no longer a career offender, instead addressing
issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic that were not raised by Caban. We therefore
conclude that the order Caban seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
interlocutory or collateral order.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the district
court for consideration of the unresolved claims. Id. at 699. 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 AND REMANDED
2