Opinion
No. 15-1595 No. 15-1602
11-19-2015
William Scott Davis, II, Appellant Pro Se. George Maralan Kelley, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia; Roger Allen Askew, WAKE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, James Nicholas Ellis, Caroline P. Mackie, Lisa Patterson Sumner, POYNER SPRUILL LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; Elizabeth A. Martineau, MARTINEAU KING PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, Peter Andrew Teumer, ROBEY TEUMER & DRASH, Norfolk, Virginia; Sydney J. Batch, BATCH, POORE & WILLIAMS LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; Joseph Tedford McFadden, Jr., RAWLS, MCNELIS & MITCHELL, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (4:13-cv-00058-RBS-DEM; 4:13-cv-00007-RBS-DEM) Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. No. 15-1595 dismissed; No. 15-1602 affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Scott Davis, II, Appellant Pro Se. George Maralan Kelley, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia; Roger Allen Askew, WAKE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, James Nicholas Ellis, Caroline P. Mackie, Lisa Patterson Sumner, POYNER SPRUILL LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; Elizabeth A. Martineau, MARTINEAU KING PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, Peter Andrew Teumer, ROBEY TEUMER & DRASH, Norfolk, Virginia; Sydney J. Batch, BATCH, POORE & WILLIAMS LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; Joseph Tedford McFadden, Jr., RAWLS, MCNELIS & MITCHELL, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, William Scott Davis, II, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motions to strike, motions for stay, and motions for extension of time in a pending civil matter, and its order returning several of his filed documents in a closed civil matter. 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 order denying Davis' motions is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Davis' motion for sanctions and dismiss Case No. 15-1595 for lack of jurisdiction.
Turning to Davis' appeal of the district court's order returning his documents, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm Case No. 15-1602 for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Singer, No. 4:13-cv-00007-RBS-DEM (E.D. Va. May 7, 2015; June 2, 2015). Davis' motion for sanctions in connection with this appeal is also 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.
No. 15-1595 DISMISSED; No. 15-1602 AFFIRMED