David Wright v. Otto Hansen, No. 20-6204 (4th Cir. 2020)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6204 DAVID WRIGHT, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PA OTTO HANSEN, individual capacity and official capacity; DR. JULIA BERRIOS, individual capacity and official capacity; DR. JUDE ONUOHA, individual capacity and official capacity; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; LUIS NEGRON, MLP; DR. CHERIE SMITH; DR. DECOCO, Defendants - Appellees, and M. TRAVIS BRAGG, FCI Bennetsville Warden, individual capacity and official capacity; R. HARSANY, Kitchen Staff Supervisor, individual capacity and official capacity; MR. BROWN, Safety Supervisor, individual capacity and official capacity; S. K. BROSIER, Executive Assistant, individual capacity and official capacity; DOES 1 THROUGH 20, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (8:17-cv-02805-DCC-JDA) Submitted: November 17, 2020 Decided: November 19, 2020 Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Wright, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: David Wright seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and dismissing Wright’s claims against the United States. 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 Wright 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 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.