Royal Pollard v. Dr. Wright (CCS)


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:16-cv-00025-RAJ-LRL. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999873586]. Mailed to: Royal Pollard. [16-6347]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6347 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/29/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6347 ROYAL L. POLLARD, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DR. WRIGHT (CCS), Doctor; MS. CLANTON, Nurse / CCS; MS. REEDES, Nurse / CCS; MS. HUTCHENS, Nurse / CCS; MS. EVANS, Nurse / CCS; MS. FERGUSON (CCS), H8A Staff; MS. MCGLAUIGHN (CCS), Nurse; DR. NAVEED (CCS), Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00025-RAJ-LRL) Submitted: June 23, 2016 Decided: June 29, 2016 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Royal Pollard, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-6347 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/29/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Royal Pollard seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. 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. § Beneficial 1292 Indus. (2012); Loan Fed. Civ. P. 337 Corp., R. U.S. 54(b); 541, Cohen 545-47 v. (1949). Because the deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied by the filing of an amended complaint, we conclude that the order Pollard seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, jurisdiction. 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?