Malcom Ryidu-X v. Maryland Division of Correction, No. 15-7110 (4th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7110 MALCOM MAXWELL RYIDU-X, a/k/a Richard Janey, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARYLAND DIVISION OF CORRECTION; WESTERN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JOHN DOE, Inmate Commissary Supervisor; MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION- HAGERSTOWN; LEE ANN CRAWFORD, Office Secretary II; MAUREEN REID, Case Management Supervisor; JOHN DOE, Keefe employee who processes inmate requests; TONY UNKNOWN, Inmate Commissary Supervisor for MCI-H; KEEFE COMMISSARY NETWORK, LLC., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:14-cv-01735-WDQ) Submitted: November 17, 2015 Decided: November 20, 2015 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Malcom Maxwell Ryidu-X, Appellant Pro Lane-Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Se. Stephanie Judith GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Malcom Maxwell Ryidu-X seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing some, but not all, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012). of his claims brought This court 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 order Ryidu-X seeks nor to appeal is neither a final interlocutory or collateral order. order an appealable Accordingly, we deny Ryidu- X’s motion for preliminary injunction and 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.