Amar Bansal; Bina Bansal v. Montgomery County, Maryland

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2012
AMAR BANSAL; BINA BANSAL,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; THOMAS BERRY, Officer,
Montgomery County Maryland Department of Police,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
MONTGOMERY COUNTY MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF POLICE; MONTGOMERY
COUNTY, MARYLAND SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (8:12-cv-00519-JFM)
Submitted: August 25, 2014 Decided: September 5, 2014
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Billy L. Ponds, THE PONDS LAW FIRM, Washington, D.C., for
Appellants. Marc P. Hansen, County Attorney, Patricia P. Via,
Chief, Division of Litigation, Karen L. Federman Henry, Chief,

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Division of Finance and Procurement, Patricia Lisehora Kane,
Associate County Attorney, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Amar and Bina Bansal seek to appeal the district
court’s order granting the motion to dismiss the claims against
Montgomery County, Maryland, and Officer Thomas Berry in the
Bansals’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. 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 order the
Bansals seek 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 this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 3 of 3 --