Sophronia C. Pettiford v. Eastern Savings Bank

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:16-cv-00754-HEH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000026761]. Mailed to: Pettiford. [16-2178]

Appeal: 16-2178

Doc: 7

Filed: 02/21/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2178

SOPHRONIA C. PETTIFORD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
EASTERN SAVINGS BANK,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:16-cv-00754-HEH)

Submitted:

February 16, 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge,
HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Decided:

DUNCAN,

February 21, 2017

Circuit

Judge,

and

Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sophronia C. Pettiford, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-2178

Doc: 7

Filed: 02/21/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Sophronia C. Pettiford seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing her civil complaint without prejudice for lack
of

subject

matter

jurisdiction.

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).

Because it is possible

that Pettiford could cure the defects in her complaint through
amendment, the order she seeks to appeal is neither a final
order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

See

Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, 807 F.3d 619, 623-25, 628-30
(4th Cir. 2015).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction, and remand the case to the district court with
instructions to allow Pettiford to file an amended complaint.
We

dispense

contentions

with
are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the

facts

and

the

materials

legal
before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED AND REMANDED

2