Lawrence Gilmartin v. NC Department of Public Safety
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:16-ct-03058-FL. Copies to all parties and the district court. . Mailed to: Lawrence Gilmartin. [16-7490]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
LAWRENCE P. GILMARTIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; DR. LAND;
MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, Greene Correctional Institution,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03058-FL)
Submitted: March 30, 2017
Decided: April 3, 2017
Before TRAXLER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence P. Gilmartin, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Lawrence P. Gilmartin seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without
prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action for failure to comply with the court’s order.
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, 545-47 (1949). Because the
deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied by the filing of an amended
complaint, we conclude that the order Gilmartin 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, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.
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?