From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Snipe v. Rivera

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Oct 5, 2011
449 F. App'x 272 (4th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 11-6731

10-05-2011

ANTHONY LAMAR SNIPE, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BUREAU OF PRISONS; MILDRED L. RIVERA, Respondents - Appellees.

Anthony Lamar Snipe, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (8:10-cv-02686-SB)

Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Lamar Snipe, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Anthony Lamar Snipe seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's report and recommendation that relief be denied on Snipe's 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2011) petition. 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 Snipe 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


Summaries of

Snipe v. Rivera

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Oct 5, 2011
449 F. App'x 272 (4th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Snipe v. Rivera

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY LAMAR SNIPE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. BUREAU OF PRISONS; MILDRED…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Oct 5, 2011

Citations

449 F. App'x 272 (4th Cir. 2011)