David Campbell v. Stonemor Partners, LP , 706 F. App'x 806 ( 2017 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-1925
DAVID A. CAMPBELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STONEMOR PARTNERS, LP,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
PAULA HARRIS, RVP; ANITA DEEB, Area Manager; LAUREN BAILEY, HR
Compliance Manager; GINA MACK, Director Benefits & Administration,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:17-cv-00407-HEH)
Submitted: December 19, 2017 Decided: December 21, 2017
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David A. Campbell, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Campbell seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without
prejudice his complaint for failure to allege facts sufficient to establish that venue was
proper in the Eastern District of Virginia. 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 district court identified a deficiency that Campbell
may remedy by filing an amended complaint, we conclude that the order Campbell 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 deny Campbell’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dismiss this
appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and remand the case to the district court with instructions
to allow Campbell 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
2