Louretha King v. Boyd Bennett ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6515
LOURETHA KING,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
SANDRA ETTERS; RONDA SINGLETARY; DEVEN DEAL,
Plaintiffs,
v.
BOYD BENNETT, Secretary, in his individual capacity; ALVIN
KELLER, in his official capacity; ANNIE HARVEY,
Administrator, in her individual and official capacities;
TIMOTHY KIMBLE, Administrator, in his individual and
official capacities; UNIT MANAGER MOORE, in his individual
capacity; UNIT MANAGER FORD, Assistant, in her individual
capacity; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER WIGGINS, in his individual
capacity; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER SIMS, in his official
capacity; NURSE BARBOSA, in his individual capacity; LAMAR
BLALOCK, Unit Manager, in his individual capacity; JESSICA
JONES, Correctional Officer, in her individual capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III,
District Judge. (5:09-ct-03187-D)
Submitted: August 25, 2011 Decided: August 30, 2011
Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Louretha King, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Finarelli, Yvonne
Bulluck Ricci, Assistant Attorneys General, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Louretha King seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing her claims in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action
involving multiple parties. This court may exercise
jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006),
and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus.
Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order King 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 the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
3