Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06011/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06011-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commonwealth of Virginia
Appellee
Department of Corrections
Appellee
District 9 Probation and Parole
Appellee
Gordon Scott Staton
Appellant
UVA Police Department
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6011

GORDON SCOTT STATON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; UVA POLICE DEPARTMENT; DISTRICT 9 

PROBATION AND PAROLE; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Chief 

District Judge. (7:14-cv-00622-GEC)

Submitted: March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015

Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gordon Scott Staton, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6011 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/17/2015 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Gordon Scott Staton appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action without prejudice*

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(2) (2012). We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny 

Staton’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. Staton v. Virginia, No. 7:14-cv00622-GEC (W.D. Va. Nov. 26, 2014). 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.

AFFIRMED

 * Although it is well established that orders dismissing 

complaints without prejudice are ordinarily interlocutory and 

not appealable, see Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local 

Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993), orders 

dismissing actions without prejudice are generally final and 

appealable. See Chao v. Rivendell Woods, Inc., 415 F.3d 342, 

345 (4th Cir. 2005).

Appeal: 15-6011 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/17/2015 Pg: 2 of 2