John Scott Hudson v. Rosemary E. Biancardi; Cory D. Collins; Timothy Vigus

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6079
JOHN SCOTT HUDSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ROSEMARY E. BIANCARDI; CORY D. COLLINS; TIMOTHY VIGUS,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
MEGAN L. LOCKLEAR,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:22-ct-03445-M-RJ)
Submitted: March 27, 2025 Decided: April 1, 2025
Before THACKER and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Scott Hudson, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Florencio Castro, WOMBLE BOND
DICKINSON (US) LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
John Scott Hudson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to
compel discovery and directing him to file discovery requests directly with the defendants
in his civil action, not the district court. 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). The order Hudson seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
interlocutory or collateral order. See Nicholas v. Wyndham Int’l, Inc., 373 F.3d 537, 541
(4th Cir. 2004) (“Discovery orders are inherently interlocutory and typically not
appealable.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). 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

-- 2 of 2 --