Filed: Jul. 09, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7814 JEFFREY ALLEN CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE; LONNIE SAUNDERS, Warden; WARDEN HOLLAR; MAJOR REDMAN, Grievance Offi- cer; LIEUTENANT SANTIAGO; SERGEANT SCOTT; SER- GEANT HARDIN; SNYDER, C/O; OFFICER JONES; COR- RECTIONAL OFFICER CONNER; SERGEANT THOMPSON, Investigator, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7814 JEFFREY ALLEN CARTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE; LONNIE SAUNDERS, Warden; WARDEN HOLLAR; MAJOR REDMAN, Grievance Offi- cer; LIEUTENANT SANTIAGO; SERGEANT SCOTT; SER- GEANT HARDIN; SNYDER, C/O; OFFICER JONES; COR- RECTIONAL OFFICER CONNER; SERGEANT THOMPSON, Investigator, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7814
JEFFREY ALLEN CARTER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
RONALD J. ANGELONE; LONNIE SAUNDERS, Warden;
WARDEN HOLLAR; MAJOR REDMAN, Grievance Offi-
cer; LIEUTENANT SANTIAGO; SERGEANT SCOTT; SER-
GEANT HARDIN; SNYDER, C/O; OFFICER JONES; COR-
RECTIONAL OFFICER CONNER; SERGEANT THOMPSON,
Investigator,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
(CA-00-951-7)
Submitted: April 6, 2001 Decided: July 9, 2001
Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Jeffrey Allen Carter, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey Allen Carter appeals the district court’s orders deny-
ing relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint
and denying reconsideration of that order. The district court
dismissed Carter’s sexual harassment claims without prejudice
because he did not allege physical injury pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A.
§ 1997e(e) (West Supp. 2000). Because Carter may re-file his com-
plaint to allege physical injury, the order in question is not a
final, appealable order as to those claims. See Domino Sugar Corp.
v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,
10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.
1993). Accordingly, we dismiss Carter’s appeal as to the sexual
harassment claims for lack of jurisdiction.
We have reviewed the record as to the remaining claims and the
district’s opinion and orders and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court as to
all other claims. Carter v. Angelone, No. CA-00-951-7 (W.D. Va.
Dec. 11 and 28, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART
2