Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06559/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06559-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sergeant Lundy
Appellee
Nurse Payne
Appellee
Tincher
Appellee
Grievance Counselor Walls
Appellee
Dustin Chase Wilson
Appellant
Warden Wright
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6559

DUSTIN C. WILSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LIEUTENANT TINCHER; SERGEANT LUNDY; WARDEN WRIGHT; GRIEVANCE 

COUNSELOR WALLS; NURSE PAYNE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Norman K. Moon, Senior

District Judge. (7:15-cv-00134-NKM-RSB)

Submitted: July 21, 2016 Decided: July 22, 2016

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dustin Chase Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Nancy Hull Davidson, 

Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Rosalie Fessier, 

TIMBERLAKE, SMITH, THOMAS & MOSES, PC, Staunton, Virginia, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6559 Doc: 23 Filed: 07/22/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Dustin C. Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

granting one defendant’s motion to dismiss and granting in part 

and denying in part the remaining defendants’ motion for summary 

judgment. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final 

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and 

collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 

54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-

46 (1949). The order Wilson seeks to appeal is neither a final 

order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See

Robinson v. Parke-Davis & Co., 685 F.2d 912, 913 (4th Cir. 

1982). 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-6559 Doc: 23 Filed: 07/22/2016 Pg: 2 of 2