Case Name: David Graham GOODMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth W. STOLLE, Sheriff/High Constable; John Doe, Sergeant/Sheriffs Deputy; John Doe, Corporal/Sheriffs Deputy; John Doe, Deputy Sheriff; Jane Doe, Deputy Sheriff, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-01-13
Citations: 549 F. App'x 231
Docket Number: No. 13-7523
Parties: David Graham GOODMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth W. STOLLE, Sheriff/High Constable; John Doe, Sergeant/Sheriffs Deputy; John Doe, Corporal/Sheriffs Deputy; John Doe, Deputy Sheriff; Jane Doe, Deputy Sheriff, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 549
Pages: 231–232

Head Matter:
David Graham GOODMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth W. STOLLE, Sheriff/High Constable; John Doe, Sergeant/Sheriffs Deputy; John Doe, Corporal/Sheriffs Deputy; John Doe, Deputy Sheriff; Jane Doe, Deputy Sheriff, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-7523.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 2, 2014.
Decided: Jan. 13, 2014.
David Graham Goodman, Appellant Pro Se.
Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Graham Goodman appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under Fed. R.Civ.P. 41(b) for failure to comply with its prior order. We vacate the order and remand for further proceedings.
We review the district court's order for abuse of discretion. See Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 95-96 (4th Cir.1989). A district court abuses its discretion when it relies on erroneous factual or legal premises. United States v. Thompson-Riviere, 561 F.3d 345, 348 (4th Cir.2009) (citation and quotations omitted). The district court dismissed Goodman's complaint because he "submitted an amended complaint but has not returned the Consent Form or exhaustion affidavit." On appeal, Goodman claims that he submitted the consent form and exhaustion affidavit in the same envelope as the amended complaint. Upon reviewing the record, we have determined that the consent form and exhaustion affidavit are located in the record at R. 11 and R. 10-2. We thus conclude that the district court relied on an erroneous factual premise in dismissing the complaint.
Accordingly, we vacate the district court's order and remand for further proceedings. We deny Goodman's motion for a temporary restraining order. 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.
VACATED AND REMANDED.