Case Name: Stephanie SHACKLEFORD; Javier Diaz-Bey, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RIVERSIDE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-02-21
Citations: 466 F. App'x 287
Docket Number: No. 11-2246
Parties: Stephanie SHACKLEFORD; Javier Diaz-Bey, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RIVERSIDE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 466
Pages: 287–288

Head Matter:
Stephanie SHACKLEFORD; Javier Diaz-Bey, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RIVERSIDE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 11-2246.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 16, 2012.
Decided: Feb. 21, 2012.
Stephanie Shackleford, Javier Diaz-Bey, Appellants pro se.
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Stephanie Shackleford and Javier Diaz-Bey seek to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice their complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2006). 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, 545-47, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because the deficiency identified by the district court— that the complaint did not assert sufficient allegations in support of its legal conclusions — may be remedied by the filing of a complaint that articulates adequate allegations, we conclude that the order Shackleford and Diaz-Bey seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.