Stanley Linder v. Isaac Stone, III ( 2016 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6029
STANLEY D. LINDER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ISAAC MCDUFFIE STONE, III, District Attorney; HARRIS BEACH,
Attorney; SEAN THORNTON, Solicitor; PATRICIA C. GRANT, Clerk
of Court,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (2:15-cv-04619-RMG)
Submitted: May 26, 2016 Decided: June 1, 2016
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and FLOYD, Circuit
Judges.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stanley D. Linder, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stanley D. Linder seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint
for failing to plead, at least as to one count, sufficient facts
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).
An order dismissing a complaint without prejudice is not an
appealable final order if “the plaintiff could save his action by
merely amending his complaint.” Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar
Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).
Where a district court dismisses an action for failure to plead
sufficient facts in the complaint, we lack appellate jurisdiction
because the plaintiff could amend the complaint to cure the
pleading deficiency. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc.,
807 F.3d 619, 624 (4th Cir. 2015).
Accordingly, we deny Linder’s motion to appoint counsel,
dismiss the appeal, and remand the case to the district court with
instructions to allow Linder to file an amended complaint. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
2
are adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED AND REMANDED
3