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)
24-1575•Rifat Shafique v. Equity Residential, a Maryland Real Estate Investment Trust
24-1575Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 23, 2024
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1575
RIFAT SHAFIQUE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
EQUITY RESIDENTIAL, a Maryland Real Estate Investment Trust,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah Lynn Boardman, District Judge. (8:24-cv-01392-DLB)
Submitted: September 19, 2024 Decided: September 23, 2024
Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rifat Shafique, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Rifat Shafique appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983
complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and denying her subsequent motion for
reconsideration. Shafique also seeks to appeal the court’s letter returning her proposed
filing because the case had since been closed.
Regarding the district court’s dismissal order and its reconsideration order, we have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
orders. Shafique v. Equity Residential, No. 8:24-cv-01392-DLB (D. Md. May 16, 2024;
filed May 20, 2024 & entered May 21, 2024).
Turning to the appeal of the district court’s letter, 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 court’s letter is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss this part of the appeal
for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Shafique’s motion for affirmative declaratory relief.
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.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
DISMISSED IN PART
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.