Dan Gramatic v. Kilolo Kijakazi, No. 22-1369 (4th Cir. 2022)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-1369 DAN C. GRAMATIC, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:21-cv-00903-CMH-TCB) Submitted: October 18, 2022 Decided: October 20, 2022 Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dan C. Gramatic, Appellant Pro Se. Meghan Elizabeth Loftus, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dan C. Gramatic seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying his self-styled motion to continue disability benefit payments and the district court’s order transferring his case to the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. 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 orders Gramatic seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. See TechnoSteel, LLC v. Beers Constr. Co., 271 F.3d 151, 160-161 (4th Cir. 2001) (holding that court of appeals lacks jurisdiction to review transfer order once case file is transferred to court outside circuit and nonappealable interlocutory or collateral decisions also transfer with case). 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.