Case Name: Timothy Lamar WALLACE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert M. STEVENSON, III, Warden of Broad River Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-05-18
Citations: 639 F. App'x 955
Docket Number: No. 15-7626
Parties: Timothy Lamar WALLACE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert M. STEVENSON, III, Warden of Broad River Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 639
Pages: 955–955

Head Matter:
Timothy Lamar WALLACE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert M. STEVENSON, III, Warden of Broad River Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 15-7626.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 6, 2016.
Decided: May 18, 2016.
Timothy Lamar Wallace, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Caroline M. Scrantom, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Lamar Wallace seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's Roseboro notice order. 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, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Wallace seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 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.
Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309, 310 (4th Cir. 1975) (holding that before summary judgment is entered against a pro se litigant, the court must notify him of his right to file counteraffidavits or other appropriate materials, and give him a reasonable opportunity to respond).