Frederick Sellers v. United States , 692 F. App'x 132 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                      UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 17-6248
    FREDERICK SELLERS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
    Elkins. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (2:15-cv-00079-JPB-RWT)
    Submitted: June 20, 2017                                          Decided: June 23, 2017
    Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded with instructions by unpublished per
    curiam opinion.
    Frederick Sellers, Appellant Pro Se. Erin Carter Tison, Assistant United States Attorney,
    Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Frederick Sellers appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint. We
    have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Sellers’
    motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Sellers v.
    United States, No. 2:15-cv-00079-JPB-RWT (N.D. W. Va., Feb. 16, 2017). However,
    because the district court, which lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over Sellers’ complaint,
    dismissed Sellers’ unnecessary surgery claim with prejudice, we vacate this portion of the
    judgment and remand the case with instructions to dismiss the claim without prejudice.
    See S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s Ass’n v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC, 
    713 F.3d 175
    , 185 (4th Cir. 2013) (explaining that dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction
    must be without prejudice); see also Robb v. United States, 
    80 F.3d 884
    , 887 n.2 (4th Cir.
    1996) (finding dismissal under independent contractor exception is dismissal for want of
    subject-matter 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.
    AFFIRMED IN PART,
    VACATED IN PART,
    AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-6248

Citation Numbers: 692 F. App'x 132

Judges: Shedd, Wynn, Diaz

Filed Date: 6/23/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024