Lionel Hurd v. Dara Robichaux

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint counsel [1000089339-2]. Originating case number: 7:16-cv-00550-JPJ-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000141402]. Mailed to: Lionel Hurd. [17-6590]

Appeal: 17-6590

Doc: 9

Filed: 08/22/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6590

LIONEL THOMAS HURD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DARA ROBICHAUX, Warden; MARION CORRECTIONAL TREATMENT
CENTER,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Roanoke. James P. Jones, District Judge. (7:16-cv-00550-JPJ-RSB)

Submitted: August 17, 2017

Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lionel Thomas Hurd, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Decided: August 22, 2017

Appeal: 17-6590

Doc: 9

Filed: 08/22/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Lionel Thomas Hurd seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim. 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 Hurd may be
able to remedy the pleading deficiencies identified by the district court by filing an
amended complaint, we conclude that the order Hurd 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, we dismiss the
appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions
to allow Hurd to amend his complaint. Goode, 807 F.3d at 630. We deny the motion to
appoint counsel. 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

2