Case Name: John D. STRASSINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. DODRILL; Doctor Friedman; Mrs. Harliss; Mr. Elli; Warden Beeler; Ms. Elsea; Mr. Lunsford; Julia Clemens; Mr. Sweder; Ms. Maynard; Ken Davis; Doctor Shimm; Doctor Bush; Jon Crogan, Captain; Manager James, S.I.S.; Lieutenant Smith; Lieutenant Moscar, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-10-29
Citations: 21 F. App'x 180
Docket Number: No. 01-7083
Parties: John D. STRASSINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. DODRILL; Doctor Friedman; Mrs. Harliss; Mr. Elli; Warden Beeler; Ms. Elsea; Mr. Lunsford; Julia Clemens; Mr. Sweder; Ms. Maynard; Ken Davis; Doctor Shimm; Doctor Bush; Jon Crogan, Captain; Manager James, S.I.S.; Lieutenant Smith; Lieutenant Moscar, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 21
Pages: 180–181

Head Matter:
John D. STRASSINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mr. DODRILL; Doctor Friedman; Mrs. Harliss; Mr. Elli; Warden Beeler; Ms. Elsea; Mr. Lunsford; Julia Clemens; Mr. Sweder; Ms. Maynard; Ken Davis; Doctor Shimm; Doctor Bush; Jon Crogan, Captain; Manager James, S.I.S.; Lieutenant Smith; Lieutenant Moscar, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-7083.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 18, 2001.
Decided Oct. 29, 2001.
John D. Strassini, pro se.
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
John D. Strassini appeals the district court's orders dismissing three of the claims in his § 1983 action and denying his motion to add four defendants and change the caption of the case. The Government has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We grant the Government's motion and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the orders are not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The orders here appealed are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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.