Kristin E. Schelin; Mark A. Watson v. Karl Linard Malloy

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-1793
KRISTIN E. SCHELIN; MARK A. WATSON,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.
KARL LINARD MALLOY,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 25-2067
KRISTIN E. SCHELIN; MARK A. WATSON,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.
KARL LINARD MALLOY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Chief District Judge. (3:25-cv-00021-MHL; 3:25-cv-
00416-MHL)
Submitted: December 23, 2025 Decided: December 30, 2025

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Before WILKINSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Karl Linard Malloy, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Karl Linard Malloy seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his appeals from two bankruptcy court orders
approving two interim applications for attorney’s fees and costs. Bankruptcy court orders
awarding interim fees and acknowledging that additional fees will likely accrue are not
final orders over which the district court has jurisdiction. In re Comput. Learning Ctrs.,
Inc., 407 F.3d 656, 662 (4th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders
dismissing as interlocutory Malloy’s appeals from the orders approving the interim fee
applications. Schelin v. Malloy, No. 3:25-cv-00021-MHL (E.D. Va. June 9, 2025); Schelin
v. Malloy, No. 3:25-cv-00416-MHL (E.D. Va. Aug. 8, 2025). 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

-- 3 of 3 --