UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1956
FELICIA A. UNDERDUE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:16-cv-00653-RJC)
Submitted: February 23, 2021 Decided: February 25, 2021
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Felicia A. Underdue, Appellant Pro Se. Tory Ian Summey, Keith Michael Weddington,
PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Felicia A. Underdue appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for
immediate reinstatement of her employment, motion for employment records, and motion
to compel. 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 district court
properly construed Underdue’s motion for reinstatement of employment as a motion for a
preliminary injunction, the denial of which is immediately appealable. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292(a)(1). We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying
Underdue’s motion for a preliminary injunction and affirm that portion of the district
court’s order. See Roe v. Dep’t of Def., 947 F.3d 207, 219 (4th Cir. 2020) (stating standard).
The district court’s decision to deny Underdue’s discovery-related motions, however, is
not immediately appealable. Accordingly, we dismiss the portion of Underdue’s appeal
challenging the denial of those motions for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Underdue’s
motion to stay the district court proceedings pending the resolution of this appeal. 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.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
DISMISSED IN PART
2