Kevin McBride v. A.C.D.F. ( 2020 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1194
KEVIN MCBRIDE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
A.C.D.F.; SHANKS, #51239, Deputy at A.C.D.F.; D. O. SAYKI, Deputy at
A.C.D.F.; HAYES, #5922, Seargent at A.C.D.F.; WATERS, Deputy; LYONS-
CARR, #5993, Seargent; GARCIA, Seargent; E. JAY, Doctor; ODARA, Deputy,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:19-cv-01156-AJT-MSN)
Submitted: September 30, 2020 Decided: October 6, 2020
Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin Thomas McBride, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kevin Thomas McBride seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without
prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over
final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-
46 (1949). “[D]ismissals without prejudice generally are not appealable ‘unless the
grounds for dismissal clearly indicate that no amendment in the complaint could cure the
defects in the plaintiff’s case.’” Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 610 (4th Cir. 2020)
(quoting Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1067
(4th Cir. 1993)). Because the district court dismissed McBride’s complaint without
prejudice to McBride filing an amended complaint, the court’s order is neither a final order
nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the district
court with instructions to allow McBride to amend the complaint. * 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
*
The same day McBride filed a notice of appeal, he filed a § 1983 complaint that
differed in several respects from his original complaint. See McBride v. A.C.D.F.,
No. 1:19-cv-01156-AJT-MSN (E.D. Va. Filed Feb. 18, 2020) (4th Cir. Electronic Record
at 80-85).
2