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)
20-1959•Mohammad M. Kargarian v. Papa John’s Pizza
20-1959Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 1, 2021
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1959
MOHAMMAD M. KARGARIAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PAPA JOHN’S PIZZA,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
ADAM SMITH, Store Manager, Papa John’s Pizza; JOSHUA, Assistant Manager,
Papa John’s Pizza; TRAVIS, Assistant Manager, Papa John’s Pizza,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
Charlotte. David C. Keesler, Magistrate Judge. (3:18-cv-00439-FDW-DCK)
Submitted: March 29, 2021 Decided: April 1, 2021
Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mohammad M. Kargarian, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Douglas Dellinger, Elizabeth Howe
Pratt, LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Mohammad M. Kargarian seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying
Kargarian’s postjudgment motion for a trial. The parties did not consent to the jurisdiction
of the magistrate judge, so the magistrate judge was not empowered to enter a final,
appealable order. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), (c)(1). The denial of Kargarian’s motion for
a trial is not a final, appealable order; accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to consider this
appeal. See Rajaratnam v. Moyer, 47 F.3d 922, 923-24 (7th Cir. 1995). We therefore
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
* In its informal response brief, Defendant Papa John’s Pizza contends that this
appeal—Kargarian’s second in this case—is frivolous and vexatious. Defendant requests
that we impose sanctions under Fed. R. App. P. 38. To the extent this request is
procedurally proper, see Fed. R. App. P. 38 (providing authorization for imposing sanctions
“after a separately filed motion or notice from the court”), we deny the request.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.