Jeffrey Cohen v. Rod Rosenstein, No. 16-7313 (4th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7313 JEFFREY BRIAN COHEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ROD J. ROSENSTEIN, US Attorney; HARRY MASON GRUBER, Asst. US Attorney; JOYCE KALLAM MCDONALD, Asst. US Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-00263-WMN) Submitted: May 31, 2017 Decided: June 8, 2017 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey Brian Cohen, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Paul Phelps, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jeffrey Brian Cohen seeks to appeal the district court’s order staying his civil suit against federal prosecutors pending resolution of his criminal direct appeal, as well as its order granting in part and denying in part Cohen’s motion for reconsideration. As a threshold inquiry to any appeal, we are obliged to satisfy ourselves of our jurisdiction to hear the matter. See Clark v. Cartledge, 829 F.3d 303, 305 (4th Cir. 2016); United States v. Bullard, 645 F.3d 237, 246 (4th Cir. 2011). We may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The orders Cohen seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. See Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 11 n.11 (1983); Amdur v. Lizars, 372 F.2d 103, 105-06 (4th Cir. 1967). 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

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.