Mawule Tepe v. Clifton Corker, No. 23-1976 (4th Cir. 2024)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-1976 MAWULE TEPE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CLIFTON L. CORKER, in his Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions; TRAVIS R. MCDONOUGH, in his Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions; KATHERINE A. CRYTZER, in her Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions; CURTIS L. COLLIER, in his Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions; SUSAN K. LEE, in her Honorable U.S. Magistrate Judge and personal positions; CHRISTOPHER H. STEGER, in his Honorable U.S. District Judge and personal positions; DANNY J. BOGGS, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; RICHARD ALLEN GRIFFIN, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; ANDRE B. MATHIS, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit District Judge and personal positions; JOHN K. BUSH, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; ERIC E. MURPHY, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; ERIC L. CLAY, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; DAVID W. MCKEAGUE, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; JOHN B. NALBANDIAN, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; RONALD LEE GILMAN, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, in her Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; CHAD A. READLER, in his Honorable U.S. Sixth Circuit Judge and personal positions; DEBORAH S. HUNT, in her Sixth Circuit Clerk’s and personal positions; MONICA M. PAGE, in her Sixth Circuit Clerk’s and personal positions; PARIS LARON ROBINSON, in his Sixth Circuit Clerk’s and personal positions; MICHELLE LAMBERT, in her Sixth Circuit Clerk’s and personal positions; LEANNA WILSON, in her District Court Clerk’s and personal positions; U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE; U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT; STATE OF TENNESSEE; STATE OF OHIO; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; UNITED STATES; LUCILLE LATTIMORE NELSON, Attorney at Ogletree Deakins Law Firm, in her personal and Attorney position; WILLIAM STEWART RUTCHOW, Attorney at Ogletree Deakins Law Firm, in his personal and Attorney position; OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART PC, Law Firm; EMILY LOUISE NENNI, Attorney at Javitch Block LLC, in her personal and Attorney position; MICHAEL D. SLODOV, Attorney at Javitch Block LLC, in his personal and Attorney position; JAVITCH BLOCK, LLC; FRANKIE NEIL SPERO, Attorney at Bradley, Arant, Boult, Cummings LLP, in his personal and Attorney capacity; BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS, LLP, Law Firm; DEREK WAYNE MULLINS, Attorney at Baker Donelson Law Firm, in his Attorney and personal position; JUSTIN MICHAEL SVEADAS, Attorney at Baker Donelson Law Firm, in his Attorney and personal position; BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, PC, Law Firm; BANK OF AMERICA; TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION; WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. David C. Keesler, Magistrate Judge. (3:23-cv-00423-RJC-DCK) Submitted: February 28, 2024 Decided: May 30, 2024 Before KING, WYNN, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mawule Tepe, Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TENNESSEE, Nashville, Tennessee; Benjamin R. Holland, Michael D. Ray, OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Michael D. Slodov, JAVITCH BLOCK, LLC, Cleveland, Ohio; Robert R. Marcus, BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina; Derek Wayne Mullins, BAKER DONELSON, Chattanooga, Tennessee; Thomas Richmond McPherson, III, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Mawule Tepe seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s August 4, 2023, order directing the filing of a response to a motion to dismiss his civil action, August 8, 2023, order granting a motion for extension of time to file an answer or otherwise respond, August 11, 2023, order denying his motion for extension of time, August 23, 2023, order denying his motion for leave to file a first amended complaint against several Defendants and directing the filing of an amended complaint or a response to the pending motion to dismiss, August 25 and August 28, 2023, orders granting motions for extension of time to answer or otherwise respond, August 30 and September 6, 2023, orders directing him to file responses to motions to dismiss, September 8, 2023, order denying his motions challenging the jurisdiction of the district court and for an order of prohibition and to strike, and September 11, 2023, order denying his motion challenging the qualification of an attorney and to strike. Appellees Javitch Block, LLC, Emily Louise Nenni, and Michael D. Slodov move to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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, 545-47 (1949). The orders Tepe seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we grant Appellees’ motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Tepe’s motions to place the appeal in abeyance, to dismiss parties and to strike, to amend or correct his notice of appeal, to accelerate case processing and to expedite decision, to vacate the district court’s case proceedings as null and void and 3 requesting a ruling on pending motions and objections, to strike, and seeking costs. We deny the motions filed by Appellees Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Derek Wayne Mullins, Justin Michael Sveadas, and Truist Financial Corporation to suspend briefing, for costs, and to affirm. We deny the motion filed by Appellees Whirlpool Corporation, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., William Stewart Rutchow, and Lucille Lattimore Nelson to affirm. 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 4

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.