Case ID: f-appx_333/html/0733-01.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

Christina D. PERRY-BEY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. CITY OF NORFOLK, VIRGINIA, Defendant—Appellee.
    No. 09-1289.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 17, 2009.
    Decided: Oct. 14, 2009.
    Christina D. Perry-Bey, Appellant. Pro Se. Paul Wilbur Jacobs, II, Christian & Barton, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, Melvin Wayne Ringer, City Attorney’s Office, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Christina D. Perry-Bey seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her complaint without prejudice. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); 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 Perry-Bey seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an ap-pealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066 (4th Cir.1993). Accordingly, we 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.