# Josephat Mua v. Board of Education of Prince George's County

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · June 21, 2016 · 667 F. App'x 27

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3215389

## Case

- **Full name:** Josephat MUA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY/Prince George’s County Public Schools; Verjeana M. Jacobs, Individually and as Board Chairperson of Prince George’s Public Schools; Dr. William R. Hite, Jr., Individually and as Superintendent; Roger C. Thomas, Esquire; Synthia J. Shilling; Monica Goldson, Individually and as Associate Superintendent of Prince George’s Public Schools; Pierre Dickson, Individually and as Agent of the Board of Education of Prince George’s County; Dr. Kevin Maxwell, Individually and as Superintendent of Prince George’s Public Schools; Dr. Alvin L. Crawley, Individually and as Superintendent; Robert J. Gaskin, Individually and Chief Human Resources of Prince George’s Public Schools; Dr. Lillian M. Lowery; Ardra O’Neal; Abbey Hairston, Defendants-Appellees, and American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees, AFSCME; Association of Classified Employees American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFSCME Local 2250, Defendants
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** June 21, 2016
- **Citations:** 667 F. App'x 27
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** King, Thacker, Harris
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3215389

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2363

JOSEPHAT MUA,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY/PRINCE
GEORGE’S COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS; VERJEANA M. JACOBS,
Individually and as Board Chairperson of Prince George’s
Public Schools; DR. WILLIAM R. HITE, JR., Individually and
as superintendent; ROGER C. THOMAS, Esquire; SYNTHIA J.
SHILLING; MONICA GOLDSON, Individually and as Associate
superintendent of Prince George’s Public Schools; PIERRE
DICKSON, Individually and as agent of the Board of
Education of Prince George’s County; DR. KEVIN MAXWELL,
Individually and as superintendent of Prince George’s
Public Schools; DR. ALVIN L. CRAWLEY, Individually and as
superintendent; ROBERT J. GASKIN, Individually and Chief
Human Resources of Prince George’s Public Schools; DR.
LILLIAN M. LOWERY; ARDRA O’NEAL; ABBEY HAIRSTON,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL
EMPLOYEES, AFSCME; ASSOCIATION OF CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES
(AFSCME), AFSCME LOCAL 2250,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District
Judge. (8:15-cv-02249-PJM)
Submitted: June 10, 2016 Decided: June 21, 2016

Before KING, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Josephat Mua, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2
PER CURIAM:

Josephat Mua seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing Mua’s case based on Mua’s failure to file an amended

complaint against the American Federation of State, County, and

Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and AFSCME Local 2250; dismissing,

without prejudice, Mua’s claims against the remaining

Defendants; and granting, in part, Mua’s motion for

reconsideration. 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 orders Mua seeks to appeal are neither final

orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.

Moreover, Mua may challenge the district court’s orders in

Appeal No. 16-1509. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction. We deny as moot Mua’s motion for leave to file

an amended initial brief and his motion to consolidate this

appeal with Appeal No. 16-1509. 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3215389. Public record. Not legal advice.