Case Name: James Lester ROUDABUSH, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lieutenant JOSIAH; Sergeant Jessup; Chief Stern; Deputy Stern; Captain Milano; Dana Lawhorne, Sheriff; A. Anderson, AUSA; C.M. Hilton, Usdc-Edva, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-01-20
Citations: 631 F. App'x 142
Docket Number: No. 15-7662
Parties: James Lester ROUDABUSH, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lieutenant JOSIAH; Sergeant Jessup; Chief Stern; Deputy Stern; Captain Milano; Dana Lawhorne, Sheriff; A. Anderson, AUSA; C.M. Hilton, Usdc-Edva, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 631
Pages: 142–143

Head Matter:
James Lester ROUDABUSH, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lieutenant JOSIAH; Sergeant Jessup; Chief Stern; Deputy Stern; Captain Milano; Dana Lawhorne, Sheriff; A. Anderson, AUSA; C.M. Hilton, Usdc-Edva, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-7662.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 14, 2016.
Decided: Jan. 20, 2016.
James Lester Roudabush, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Broderick Coleman Dunn, Alexander Francuzenko, Cook Craig & Francuz-enko, PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appel-lees.
Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his civil action without prejudice. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because the deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied by the filing of an amended complaint, we conclude that the order Roudabush 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, 623-25, No. 14-1939, 2015 WL 8289046, at *3-*4 (4th Cir. Dec. 9, 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union §92, 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.