Filed: Jun. 22, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6172 ROBIN VIRGINIA MEADOWS COLLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PAT GREEN; ELLIOTT PANNELL; H. M. EDWARDS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:14-ct-03111-D) Submitted: June 18, 2015 Decided: June 22, 2015 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6172 ROBIN VIRGINIA MEADOWS COLLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PAT GREEN; ELLIOTT PANNELL; H. M. EDWARDS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:14-ct-03111-D) Submitted: June 18, 2015 Decided: June 22, 2015 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opin..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6172
ROBIN VIRGINIA MEADOWS COLLINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PAT GREEN; ELLIOTT PANNELL; H. M. EDWARDS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (5:14-ct-03111-D)
Submitted: June 18, 2015 Decided: June 22, 2015
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robin Virginia Meadows Collins, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robin Virginia Meadows Collins seeks to appeal the district
court’s order dismissing without prejudice her civil rights
action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2012) for failure to state
a claim on which relief may be granted. 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, 545-47 (1949). Because the
deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied by
the filing of an amended complaint, we conclude that the order
Collins seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Domino Sugar
Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,
10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67
(4th Cir. 1993).
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