Larry Lamont Bush v. Price, No. CA-03-2264-1-AMD D. Md. Mar. 17, 2004 . To the extent that Bush appeals…

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6685
LARRY LAMONT BUSH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JOHN H. PRICE, Warden; WILLIAM BRITTON, Case
Manager; MARY CHAPLIN-COLE, Case Manager; M.
STOUFFER, Warden; K. HOFFMAN, Case Manager,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-03-
2264-1-AMD)
Submitted: October 20, 2004 Decided: December 6, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Larry Lamont Bush, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney
General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Larry Lamont Bush appeals the district court’s order
denying his motions for a preliminary injunction and to compel
discovery in this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000).
With regard to the denial of injunctive relief, we have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bush v. Price,
No. CA-03-2264-1-AMD (D. Md. Mar. 17, 2004).
To the extent that Bush appeals the denial of the motion
to compel discovery, this court may exercise jurisdiction only over
final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory
and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949).
The order Bush seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we
dismiss this portion of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We
grant the motion to submit on informal briefs and 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.
AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART

-- 2 of 2 --