Alice Roseboro v. Comporium Communications ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 12-2226
    ALICE L. ROSEBORO,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    COMPORIUM COMMUNICATIONS, Rock Hill Telephone Co; MARY
    GRAVELEY; TIFFANY THOMPSON; LOUIS RIDINGER; FRANK MARSHALL;
    GLEN MCFADDEN; JEFF BUSHARDT,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill.       Margaret B. Seymour, Chief
    District Judge. (0:10-cv-03267-MBS-PJG)
    Submitted:   January 22, 2013             Decided: January 24, 2013
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Alice L. Roseboro, Appellant Pro Se.       Beverly A. Carroll,
    HAMILTON MARTENS BALLOU & SIPE, LLC, Rock Hill, South Carolina,
    for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Alice L. Roseboro seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying
    her motion for default judgment and sanctions in her ongoing
    employment      discrimination       action.              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 Roseboro
    seeks    to   appeal    is    neither    a        final   order    nor    an    appealable
    interlocutory or collateral order.                    Accordingly, we dismiss the
    appeal    for    lack        of   jurisdiction.              Roseboro’s        motion   to
    amend/correct letter is denied.                   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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-2226

Filed Date: 1/24/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021