Althea Hughes v. Bank of America , 675 F. App'x 321 ( 2017 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-2026
ALTHEA MARIE HUGHES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:16-cv-00672-HEH)
Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 2, 2017
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Althea Marie Hughes, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald James Guillot,
Jr., SAMUEL I. WHITE, PC, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Althea Marie Hughes seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing her civil complaint without prejudice pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). 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 Hughes may be
able to remedy the deficiencies identified by the district court
by filing an amended complaint stating sufficient facts to
support her claims, the order Hughes seeks to appeal is neither
a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral
order. Goode v. Central Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, 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 Hughes to
file an amended complaint. We deny Hughes’ motion for
transcripts at government expense. 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