Opinion
21-7579
06-30-2022
Andre Ricardo Roach, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: June 28, 2022
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:11-cr-00526-GLR-1)
Andre Ricardo Roach, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Andre Ricardo Roach seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying his motion seeking a sentence reduction under § 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, and denying reconsideration. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). "Ordinarily, a district court order is not final until it has resolved all claims as to all parties." Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Our review of the record reveals that the district court did not adjudicate all of the claims raised in the motion. Id. at 696-97. Specifically, the court failed to address Roach's 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) arguments for a sentence reduction. We conclude that the orders Roach seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the district court for consideration of the unresolved claim. Id. at 699. We express no view on the merit of any of Roach's claims. 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 AND REMANDED