Case Name: Clarence ROULHAC, Jr., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES; Linda Ray, Ms., Head Nurse, Powhatan Correctional Center; L. Kump, Ms., Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center; A. Toney, Mr., Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center; B.S. Janek, DMD, Dentist, Powhatan Correctional Center; Fred Schillings, Dr., Health Service Director, VDOC, Defendants - Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-06-20
Citations: 474 F. App'x 214
Docket Number: No. 12-6528
Parties: Clarence ROULHAC, Jr., Plaintiff — Appellant, v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES; Linda Ray, Ms., Head Nurse, Powhatan Correctional Center; L. Kump, Ms., Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center; A. Toney, Mr., Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center; B.S. Janek, DMD, Dentist, Powhatan Correctional Center; Fred Schillings, Dr., Health Service Director, VDOC, Defendants — Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 214–215

Head Matter:
Clarence ROULHAC, Jr., Plaintiff — Appellant, v. PRISON HEALTH SERVICES; Linda Ray, Ms., Head Nurse, Powhatan Correctional Center; L. Kump, Ms., Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center; A. Toney, Mr., Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center; B.S. Janek, DMD, Dentist, Powhatan Correctional Center; Fred Schillings, Dr., Health Service Director, VDOC, Defendants — Appellees.
No. 12-6528.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 14, 2012.
Decided: June 20, 2012.
Clarence Roulhac, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Martin Muldowney, Rawls & McNelis, PC, Richmond, Virginia; John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appel-lees.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Clarence Roulhac, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's orders dismissing four of five defendants in Roulhac's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action and denying as moot Roulhac's motion for summary judgment. 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, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The orders Roulhac 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.