Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charlie THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2018-03-14
Citations: 714 F. App'x 288
Docket Number: No. 17-7384
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charlie THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 714
Pages: 288–289

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charlie THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-7384
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 8, 2018
Decided: March 14, 2018
Charlie Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Kyle David Pousson, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee,
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charlie Thompson seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. This court may exercise ju risdiction 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, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because the district court failed to address Thompson's claim based on Dean v. United States, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1170, 197 L.Ed.2d 490 (2017), the order Thompson seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696-97 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court for consideration of Thompson's Dean claim. We express no opinion on the merits of any of Thompson's claims. Wé 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 AND REMANDED