Filed: Apr. 07, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1999 WILLIAM R. GEIST, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, and WILLIAM R. ERICSON BROWN, Leaser-Grantor, USE, United States and Maryland-Personal Properties Owner Warden/Right of Way, Owner, Plaintiff, versus RAY J. LEWIS, Officer-Corrections, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 05-1963-CCB) Submitted: March 24, 2006
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1999 WILLIAM R. GEIST, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, and WILLIAM R. ERICSON BROWN, Leaser-Grantor, USE, United States and Maryland-Personal Properties Owner Warden/Right of Way, Owner, Plaintiff, versus RAY J. LEWIS, Officer-Corrections, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 05-1963-CCB) Submitted: March 24, 2006 D..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1999
WILLIAM R. GEIST, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
WILLIAM R. ERICSON BROWN, Leaser-Grantor, USE,
United States and Maryland-Personal Properties
Owner Warden/Right of Way, Owner,
Plaintiff,
versus
RAY J. LEWIS, Officer-Corrections,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-
05-1963-CCB)
Submitted: March 24, 2006 Decided: April 7, 2006
Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William R. Geist, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
William R. Geist, Jr., seeks to appeal from the district
court’s order dismissing his complaint without prejudice because
the court was unable to discern the basis of its subject matter
jurisdiction from the face of the complaint. Because Geist could
remedy his complaint’s dismissal by amending the complaint to
clarify his claims and the basis for federal subject matter
jurisdiction, the district court’s order is not reviewable. See
Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,
10 F.3d 1064,
1067 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 2 -