Case ID: f-appx_35/html/0099-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James L. JACK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. David ROBINSON, Warden; Janet Terry, Law Library Coordinator; Sergeant Frame, Correctional Officer, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 02-6259.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 16, 2002.
    Decided May 23, 2002.
    James L. Jack, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

James L. Jack appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his complaint alleging violations under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001). The court dismissed Jack’s complaint based on his failure to allege sufficient facts regarding the actual prejudice suffered as a result of his alleged denial of his constitutional right of access to the courts. Because Jack might proceed with this action by amending his complaint to provide the information specified by the district court, the dismissal order is not final and thus is not subject to appellate review. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.1993). We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.