Anthony Wright v. NC General Assembly

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:16-ct-03096-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000007265]. Mailed to: Anthony Wright. [16-7593]

Appeal: 16-7593

Doc: 14

Filed: 01/20/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7593

ANTHONY WRIGHT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY; GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA,
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-03096-FL)

Submitted:

January 17, 2017

Decided:

January 20, 2017

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Wright, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7593

Doc: 14

Filed: 01/20/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Anthony Wright seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing

without

prejudice

his

42

U.S.C.

§ 1983

complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012).
may

exercise

jurisdiction

only

over

final

orders,

(2012)

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

545-47

v.

(1949).

Because the deficiency identified by the district court may be
remedied by the filing of an amended complaint, we conclude that
the order Wright 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, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015);
Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d
1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).
Accordingly,
jurisdiction

and

we

dismiss

remand

the

this

case

appeal

to

the

for

district

lack
court

with

instructions to allow Wright to file an amended complaint.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

of

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED AND REMANDED

2