Timothy Jones v. Mr. Townley

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998923437-2] Originating case number: 3:11-cv-00509-JRS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998989163]. Mailed to: Timothy Jones. [12-7197]

Appeal: 12-7197

Doc: 8

Filed: 11/27/2012

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7197

TIMOTHY A. JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MR. TOWNLEY, Superintendent, Halifax Correctional Unit #23;
JOHN DOE(S), Halifax Correctional Unit #23; JANE DOE(S),
Halifax Correctional Unit #23,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
James R. Spencer, District
Judge. (3:11-cv-00509-JRS)

Submitted:

November 20, 2012

Before TRAXLER,
Judges.

Chief

Judge,

Decided: November 27, 2012

and

SHEDD

and

FLOYD,

Circuit

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy A. Jones, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-7197

Doc: 8

Filed: 11/27/2012

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Timothy
complaint
court’s

in

A.

the

order

Jones

filed

district

dismissing

a

court.
his

42

U.S.C.

He

appeals

action

without

§

1983
the

(2006)

district

prejudice

for

failure to comply with the magistrate judge’s order informing
Jones that he needed to particularize his complaint.
This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final
orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and
collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 54547 (1949).

Because the deficiencies identified by the district

court, that Jones failed to particularize his claims, may be
remedied

by

requirements
district

the
of

filing
the

court’s

of

a

complaint

district

court,

that

we

conclude

order

is

neither

a

final

interlocutory

appealable

satisfies

or

collateral

order.

the

that

order

the

nor

Domino

an

Sugar

Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67
(4th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma

pauperis and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2