Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-01382/USCOURTS-ca4-16-01382-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dollar Tree
Appellee
Sylvia Jenkins
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1382

SYLVIA JENKINS,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

DOLLAR TREE CORPORATION,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (2:16-cv-00047-MSD-DEM)

Submitted: August 18, 2016 Decided: August 22, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sylvia Jenkins, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1382 Doc: 7 Filed: 08/22/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Sylvia Jenkins seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

dismissing her civil complaint. 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, 545-47 (1949). Because the 

deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied 

through the filing of an amended complaint averring sufficient 

facts in support of Jenkins’ claim, we conclude that the order 

Jenkins seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an 

appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Goode v. Cent. 

Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015); 

Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 

1064, 1066-67 (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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-1382 Doc: 7 Filed: 08/22/2016 Pg: 2 of 2