Case ID: f-appx_77/html/0670-02.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

Ronnie VAUGHAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Correctional Officer BLEDSOE; Sergeant Coleman; Grievance Coordinator Bedwell; Lieutenant Cassel, Correctional Lieutenant, Powhatan, Investigator Lieutenant; Lieutenant Rogers; Sergeant Brown, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 03-6593.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 12, 2003.
    Decided Oct. 10, 2003.
    Ronnie Vaughan, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before LUTTIG and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    
      
       The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d) (2000).
    
   PER CURIAM.

Ronnie Vaughan, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order appealed from is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order because Vaughan may proceed by simply amending his complaint to provide proof that he has exhausted his administrative remedies. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, we deny Vaughan’s motion for appointment of counsel and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.