Andres Glenn v. Lize Stowe
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:14-cv-01580-CMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999478854]. Mailed to: Glenn. [14-1725]
Appeal: 14-1725
Doc: 14
Filed: 11/20/2014
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1725
ANDRES LEROY GLENN,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
LIZE STOWE; ELIBETH EZACK; SUE GALE; MICHELL MOORE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia.
Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior
District Judge. (3:14-cv-01580-CMC)
Submitted:
November 18, 2014
Decided:
November 20, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andres Leroy Glenn, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-1725
Doc: 14
Filed: 11/20/2014
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Andres
Leroy
Glenn
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and
dismissing his civil action without prejudice.
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, 545-46 (1949).
seeks
to
appeal
is
neither
a
final
order
The order Glenn
nor
an
appealable
interlocutory or collateral order, as Glenn may be able to save
the
action
by
amending
his
complaint
to
cure
deficiencies identified by the district court.
the
pleading
See Domino Sugar
Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67
(4th Cir. 1993).
jurisdiction.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of
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
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?