Case Name: Richard E. FOSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF GREENVILLE FIRE DEPARTMENT; Chief W.T. (Tommy) McDowell, Fire Marshall; L.H. Godfrey, Assistant Fire Marshall; R.A. Cook; Kenny V. Crosby, Director of Human Resources, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-07-31
Citations: 42 F. App'x 595
Docket Number: No. 02-1617
Parties: Richard E. FOSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF GREENVILLE FIRE DEPARTMENT; Chief W.T. (Tommy) McDowell, Fire Marshall; L.H. Godfrey, Assistant Fire Marshall; R.A. Cook; Kenny V. Crosby, Director of Human Resources, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 42
Pages: 595–595

Head Matter:
Richard E. FOSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF GREENVILLE FIRE DEPARTMENT; Chief W.T. (Tommy) McDowell, Fire Marshall; L.H. Godfrey, Assistant Fire Marshall; R.A. Cook; Kenny V. Crosby, Director of Human Resources, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-1617.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 25, 2002.
Decided July 31, 2002.
Richard E. Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Deborah Casey Brown, Gallivan, White & Boyd, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Richard E. Foster appeals the district court's order dismissing individual defendants from his employment discrimination action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not ap-pealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); 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 order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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.