Lucius McLean v. L. Oligmueller, Jr., No. 10-6212 (4th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6212 LUCIUS ELWOOD MCLEAN, Plaintiff Appellant, v. L. A. OLIGMUELLER, JR., Detective; OFFICE; B. J. BARNES; SGT. LINEIR, DISTRICT ATTORNEY S Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Thomas David Schroeder, District Judge. (1:09-cv-00953-TDS-LPA) Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 24, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lucius Elwood McLean, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lucius Elwood McLean seeks to appeal the magistrate judge s order and recommendation to dismiss McLean s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint without prejudice. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and 28 U.S.C. certain § 1292 interlocutory (2006); Fed. R. and Civ. collateral P. 54(b); orders, Cohen Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47 (1949). magistrate judge s order is neither a final appealable interlocutory or collateral order. order v. The nor an Moreover, where a magistrate judge has been designated by a district court judge to submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of a prisoner petition challenging conditions of confinement under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006), the parties must be given fourteen days within which to serve and file written objections, and the district judge is required to make a de novo specified determination proposed Accordingly, jurisdiction. those findings objection is made. 2009). of or portions of the recommendations report to or which 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2006 and Supp. 1A we dismiss the appeal for lack of We dispense with oral argument because the facts 2 and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.