Opinion
24-1474
07-17-2024
BRUNO K. MPOY, Individually and as a Next Friend of T.M. and C.M., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STATE OF MARYLAND; MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; MARCY WAXMAN; RE/MAX REALTY GROUP; FARROKH MOHAMMADI; MOHAMMADI &HUMAYUN, LLC; C.L.A. TITLE &ESCROW; SHARON T. DIAMANT; DIAMANT GERSTEIN, LLC; DONTRICE P. HAMILTON; SUSAN M. BRYANT; COREY RYAN CLIFFORD, In his Personal and Official Capacity; KEVIN BORGE, In his Personal and Official Capacity; BRAD MORTON, In his Personal and Official Capacity; RALPH ALOI, In his Personal and Official Capacity; FRANK D. PRUITT, In his Personal and Official Capacity; JASON CORDERO, In his Personal and Official Capacity; LENWORTH W. BLACK, In his Personal and Official Capacity; KATHRYN M. HUFF; CAPTAIN ROBIN LEWIS, In her Personal and Official Capacity; MADHURI PERERA, In her Personal and Official Capacity; DENISE ANDERSON, In her Personal and Official Capacity; CESAR IVAN ELOISA, Code Enforcement; TAMALA ROBINSON, Code Enforcement, Defendants - Appellees.
Bruno K. Mpoy, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: July 8, 2024
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Brendan A. Hurson, District Judge. (8:23-cv-01927-BAH)
Bruno K. Mpoy, Appellant Pro Se.
Before THACKER and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Bruno K. Mpoy seeks to appeal the district court's order denying reconsideration of its order dismissing the State of Maryland as a defendant in his civil 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 that Mpoy seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 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.