Case Name: Ronald MCCLARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lieutenant CROSSON; Officer Williams; Officer Hicks; Officer Walls, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-22
Citations: 670 F. App'x 834
Docket Number: No. 16-7175
Parties: Ronald MCCLARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lieutenant CROSSON; Officer Williams; Officer Hicks; Officer Walls, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 834–835

Head Matter:
Ronald MCCLARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lieutenant CROSSON; Officer Williams; Officer Hicks; Officer Walls, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-7175
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: November 17, 2016
Decided: November 22, 2016
Ronald McClary, Appellant Pro Se. Vanessa N. Totten, Assistant Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ronald McClary seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order granting the Defendants an enlargement of time to answer his complaint or file a responsive pleading. 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 magistrate judge's order is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, 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