Case Name: Charles JONES, a/k/a Nicholas Warner Jones, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mary Ann SAAR, Maryland State Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services; John Snowden, Lieutenant; Julius Williams, Sargeant, Defendants-Appellees, and Dante Green, Prison # 309110; Donald White; Darryl Taylor, Prison #299166, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-28
Citations: 117 F. App'x 292
Docket Number: No. 04-7674
Parties: Charles JONES, a/k/a Nicholas Warner Jones, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Mary Ann SAAR, Maryland State Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services; John Snowden, Lieutenant; Julius Williams, Sargeant, Defendants—Appellees, and Dante Green, Prison # 309110; Donald White; Darryl Taylor, Prison #299166, Defendants.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 117
Pages: 292–293

Head Matter:
Charles JONES, a/k/a Nicholas Warner Jones, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Mary Ann SAAR, Maryland State Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services; John Snowden, Lieutenant; Julius Williams, Sargeant, Defendants—Appellees, and Dante Green, Prison # 309110; Donald White; Darryl Taylor, Prison #299166, Defendants.
No. 04-7674.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 16, 2004.
Decided Dec. 28, 2004.
Charles Jones, Appellant pro se. Glenn William Bell, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Charles Jones seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); 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 Jones 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED