The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
11-2088•Ronald Brunson v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
11-2088Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 2, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-2088
RONALD BRUNSON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 11-2097
RONALD BRUNSON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, District of South Carolina;
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; FEDERAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION; STEVE PATTERSON, Intercity Broadcasting;
NAACP, National Association Advancement Colored People;
STATE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NAACP; PRESIDENT RUBY JOHNSON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of South Carolina, at Columbia. Paige Jones Gossett, Magistrate
Judge. (3:11-cv-02132-JFA; 3:11-cv-02313-JFA)
Submitted: January 31, 2012 Decided: February 2, 2012
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Brunson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated cases, Ronald Brunson seeks to
appeal the magistrate judge’s reports recommending that the
district court, dismiss Brunson’s complaints. 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 orders
Brunson seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor are they
appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeals 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.