SARIA WALKER, United States of American Citizens v. United States Federal Government

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-2116
SARIA WALKER, United States of American Citizens,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; HOUSE OF RAEFORD FARMS,
INCORPORATED; PRISMA HEALTH; SAINT FRANCES DOWNTOWN;
SAINT FRANCES EASTSIDE; THE CAROLINA CENTER FOR BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES;
GREER POLICE DEPARTMENT; GREENVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT;
GREENVILLE COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Clerk of Court;
GREENLINK; GREENVILLE LIBRARY SYSTEM, Downtown and Anderson
Road Branches,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:22-cv-02946-HMH)
Submitted: January 17, 2023 Decided: January 19, 2023
Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Saria Walker, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Saria Walker seeks to appeal the district court’s October 20, 2022, order adopting
the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing without prejudice Walker’s
42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. 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 Walker seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or
collateral order. On October 24, 2022, the district court granted Walker’s motion to reopen
the case and provided Walker 14 days to file any objections to the magistrate judge’s report.
See Walker v. U.S. Fed. Gov’t, No. 6:22-cv-02946-HMH (D.S.C. Oct. 24, 2022). The case
remains pending in the district court. 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 --