Katherine Robinson v. Chesapeake Bank of Maryland , 691 F. App'x 782 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 17-1217
    KATHERINE B. ROBINSON; DANA B. WILLIAMS,
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    v.
    CHESAPEAKE BANK OF MARYLAND; PROCTOR FINANCIAL, INC.,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
    Catherine C. Blake, Chief District Judge. (1:16-cv-04119-CCB)
    Submitted: June 20, 2017                                          Decided: June 22, 2017
    Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Katherine B. Robinson, Dana B. Williams, Appellants Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Katherine B. Robinson seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without
    prejudice her civil complaint against Defendants after Robinson failed to comply with the
    district court’s prior order directing Robinson to supplement her 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
    , 545-46 (1949). Because the deficiencies
    identified by the district court may be remedied by the filing of an amended complaint,
    the order Robinson 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. * 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
    *
    We do not remand this matter to the district court because the court previously
    afforded Robinson the chance to supplement her complaint. Cf. Goode, 807 F.3d at 629-
    30.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-1217

Citation Numbers: 691 F. App'x 782

Judges: Shedd, Wynn, Diaz

Filed Date: 6/22/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024