Case Name: Timothy Tyrone GARVIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kirk L. OWEN, Detective; Mike Grabowski, Officer; Bryan Griswold, Officer; Chuck Cain, Investigator; Truxton Umsted, Officer; Christopher Hammell, Officer; Pete Frommer, Chief; Michael E. Hunt, Sheriff, in their individual, collective, and official capacities while acting within the scope of their employment and acting under color of state law; Aiken County; Aiken City, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-08-05
Citations: 340 F. App'x 169
Docket Number: No. 09-6527
Parties: Timothy Tyrone GARVIN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Kirk L. OWEN, Detective; Mike Grabowski, Officer; Bryan Griswold, Officer; Chuck Cain, Investigator; Truxton Umsted, Officer; Christopher Hammell, Officer; Pete Frommer, Chief; Michael E. Hunt, Sheriff, in their individual, collective, and official capacities while acting within the scope of their employment and acting under color of state law; Aiken County; Aiken City, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 340
Pages: 169–170

Head Matter:
Timothy Tyrone GARVIN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Kirk L. OWEN, Detective; Mike Grabowski, Officer; Bryan Griswold, Officer; Chuck Cain, Investigator; Truxton Umsted, Officer; Christopher Hammell, Officer; Pete Frommer, Chief; Michael E. Hunt, Sheriff, in their individual, collective, and official capacities while acting within the scope of their employment and acting under color of state law; Aiken County; Aiken City, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 09-6527.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 30, 2009.
Decided: Aug. 5, 2009.
Timothy Tyrone Garvin, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Tyrone Garvin seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his claim of false imprisonment, and the court's subsequent order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his complaint as to certain defendants, denying his motion to alter or amend a previous order, and denying his motion to amend his complaint. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The orders Garvin seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. 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.