Case ID: f-appx_332/html/0105-02.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

Winfred WITHERSPOON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James HOLWAGER; Karen Straton, R.N.; Correctional Officer Smith; S. Hafercamp, Psych Assoc., Defendants-Appellees, v. Douglas F. Gansler, Party-in-Interest-Appellee.
    No. 09-6579.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 20, 2009.
    Decided: Aug. 26, 2009.
    
      Winfred Witherspoon, Appellant Pro Se. Deborah Elizabeth Kane, Hartel Kane De-santis MacDonald & Howie, LLP, Belts-ville, Maryland; Nichole C. Gatewood, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Winfred Witherspoon seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his “refiled motion for leave to file an amended complaint.” 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 Witherspoon seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 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.