Case Name: Robin Virginia Meadow COLLINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pat GREEN; Elliott Pannell; H.M. Edwards; Janelle Thorne; Sergeant Perry; Sergeant Whitley; Sgt. Johnson; Sgt. Wilson; Officer Kemp; Nurse Maria; Lois Verzall, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-04-21
Citations: 600 F. App'x 140
Docket Number: No. 15-6169
Parties: Robin Virginia Meadow COLLINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pat GREEN; Elliott Pannell; H.M. Edwards; Janelle Thorne; Sergeant Perry; Sergeant Whitley; Sgt. Johnson; Sgt. Wilson; Officer Kemp; Nurse Maria; Lois Verzall, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 600
Pages: 140–140

Head Matter:
Robin Virginia Meadow COLLINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pat GREEN; Elliott Pannell; H.M. Edwards; Janelle Thorne; Sergeant Perry; Sergeant Whitley; Sgt. Johnson; Sgt. Wilson; Officer Kemp; Nurse Maria; Lois Verzall, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-6169.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 16, 2015.
Decided: April 21, 2015.
Robin Virginia Meadow Collins, Appellant Pro Se.
Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robin Virginia Meadow Collins seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil action. Collins' complaint was dismissed for failure to comply with the district court's order directing that she particularize her claims and provide information relative to the exhaustion of her administrative remedies. 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). The order Collins seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order because it is possible for her to cure the deficiencies identified by the district court by filing an amended complaint. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.1993). 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.