Michael Breyan v. Classification Employee
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:17-cv-00062-BHH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: M Breyan. [17-6175]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff - Appellant,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:17-cv-00062-BHH)
Submitted: June 22, 2017
Decided: June 26, 2017
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Breyan, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Michael Breyan seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s
recommendation and dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. 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 filing an amended complaint, we conclude that the
order Breyan seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral
order. See 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, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district
court with instructions to allow Breyan to amend his complaint. Goode, 807 F.3d at 630. 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 AND REMANDED
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?