Case Name: Pierre Richard AUGUSTIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECTEK, INCORPORATED; Sectek Protective Services; Wilfred D. Blood; Michelle Fowler; Frederick Springfield; National Association Of Special Police and Security Officers, (NASPSO); Caleb Burriss; John Doe, Individuals yet to be determined, if any, also involved in the making of materially false statement and fraud as involved in this case; Jane Doe, Individuals yet to be determined, if any, also involved in the making of materially false statement and fraud as involved in this case, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-02-13
Citations: 465 F. App'x 243
Docket Number: No. 11-1980
Parties: Pierre Richard AUGUSTIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECTEK, INCORPORATED; Sectek Protective Services; Wilfred D. Blood; Michelle Fowler; Frederick Springfield; National Association Of Special Police and Security Officers, (NASPSO); Caleb Burriss; John Doe, Individuals yet to be determined, if any, also involved in the making of materially false statement and fraud as involved in this case; Jane Doe, Individuals yet to be determined, if any, also involved in the making of materially false statement and fraud as involved in this case, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 465
Pages: 243–244

Head Matter:
Pierre Richard AUGUSTIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECTEK, INCORPORATED; Sectek Protective Services; Wilfred D. Blood; Michelle Fowler; Frederick Springfield; National Association Of Special Police and Security Officers, (NASPSO); Caleb Burriss; John Doe, Individuals yet to be determined, if any, also involved in the making of materially false statement and fraud as involved in this case; Jane Doe, Individuals yet to be determined, if any, also involved in the making of materially false statement and fraud as involved in this case, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-1980.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 9, 2012.
Decided: Feb. 13, 2012.
Pierre Richard Augustin, Appellant Pro Se. Steven William Ray, Isler, Dare, Ray, Radcliffe & Connolly, PC, Vienna, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Pierre Richard Augustin seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his claims against some but not all of the defendants named in his suit. 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, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order that Augus-tin 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.