Case Name: Momolu V.S. SIRLEAF, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. David ROBINSON, Chief of Operations, VDOC, sued individually and in official capacity; Wall, Prison Chaplin, GRCC, in official and individual capacity; Harold Clark, Director, VADOC, in his official and individual capacity; Eddie Pearson, Warden, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Caroline Parker, Warden, GRCC, in her official and individual capacity; D. Wilmouth, Warden, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Vargo, Warden, GRCC, in her official and individual capacity; Keefe, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Colonel Jarratt, Supervising Guard, GRCC/VADOC, in his official and individual capacity; Grace, GRCC, in his/her official and individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-02-14
Citations: 676 F. App'x 201
Docket Number: No. 16-7361
Parties: Momolu V.S. SIRLEAF, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. David ROBINSON, Chief of Operations, VDOC, sued individually and in official capacity; Wall, Prison Chaplin, GRCC, in official and individual capacity; Harold Clark, Director, VADOC, in his official and individual capacity; Eddie Pearson, Warden, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Caroline Parker, Warden, GRCC, in her official and individual capacity; D. Wilmouth, Warden, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Vargo, Warden, GRCC, in her official and individual capacity; Keefe, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Colonel Jarratt, Supervising Guard, GRCC/VADOC, in his official and individual capacity; Grace, GRCC, in his/her official and individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 676
Pages: 201–202

Head Matter:
Momolu V.S. SIRLEAF, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. David ROBINSON, Chief of Operations, VDOC, sued individually and in official capacity; Wall, Prison Chaplin, GRCC, in official and individual capacity; Harold Clark, Director, VADOC, in his official and individual capacity; Eddie Pearson, Warden, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Caroline Parker, Warden, GRCC, in her official and individual capacity; D. Wilmouth, Warden, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Vargo, Warden, GRCC, in her official and individual capacity; Keefe, GRCC, in his official and individual capacity; Colonel Jarratt, Supervising Guard, GRCC/VADOC, in his official and individual capacity; Grace, GRCC, in his/her official and individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-7361
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: February 7, 2017
Decided: February 14, 2017
Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Appellant Pro Se.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Momolu V.S. Sirleaf seeks to appeal the district court's orders dismissing his civil action without prejudice and giving him an opportunity to reinstate his action. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders of the district court, 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 orders that Sirleaf seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appeal-able interlocutory or collateral orders. See Goode v. Central Va. Legal Aid Society, 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we deny the pending motion and 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