Opinion
No. 17-2428
05-04-2018
KIMBERLY T. SPENCE, f/k/a Kimberly S. Willis, Plaintiff - Appellant, and WILLIAM M. WINDSOR, Plaintiff, v. CARL J. WILLIS, II, Defendant - Appellee, and WELLSTAR MEDICAL GROUP PEDIATRIC & ADOLESCENT CENTER; ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH CARDINALS, of Atlanta; ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE, of Atlanta; ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST CATHOLIC SCHOOL AND LEADERSHIP; UNITED METHODIST CHURCH BISHOPS; BEN HILL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH; BEN HILL CHRISTIAN ACADEMY; WOODWARD ACADEMY; GEORGIA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY; GEORGIA FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY; CREATE-A-LOAD KENNESAW; REUNION PLACE SUBDIVISION; PAT ASTRIN; RE/MAX OF GEORGIA; PAT ASTRIN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC; CHELSEA BYNUM; MIA NICOLE SPENCER; MAID OF THE MIST CORPORATION; SEAN M. BOUSHIE; UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants.
Kimberly T. Spence, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:17-cv-00272-D) Before NIEMEYER, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kimberly T. Spence, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Kimberly T. Spence seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation recommending that Spence's civil action be dismissed as frivolous. 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 memorandum and recommendation Spence seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), (c)(1) (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Donaldson v. Ducote, 373 F.3d 622, 624 (5th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and deny Spence's pending motions as moot. 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