Doreen Shing v. MD Developmental Disabilitie


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to submit on the briefs (Local Rule 34(e)) [999867460-2] Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00683-RDB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000006376]. Mailed to: Shing. [16-1467]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1467 Doc: 14 Filed: 01/19/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1467 DOREEN SHING, Plaintiff - Appellant, and MAY SHING, Plaintiff, v. MD DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE, ADMINISTRATION; MD DEPT OF Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:16-cv-00683-RDB) Submitted: January 9, 2017 Before DIAZ and Circuit Judge. HARRIS, Decided: Circuit Judges, and January 19, 2017 DAVIS, Senior Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Doreen Shing, Appellant Pro Se. William G. Dunlap, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-1467 Doc: 14 Filed: 01/19/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Doreen and May Shing (“the Shings”) seek to appeal the district court’s order dismissing their civil complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, This court 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Beneficial Indus. Loan Fed. R. P. 337 Corp., Civ. 54(b); U.S. 541, Cohen 545-46 v. (1949). Because it is possible that the Shings could cure the defects in their complaint through amendment, the order they seek to appeal is neither a final collateral order. order nor an appealable interlocutory or See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, 807 F.3d 619, 623-25 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we deny as moot Appellees’ motion to submit on the briefs, dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow the Shings to file an amended complaint. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. DISMISSED AND REMANDED 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?