U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1996

Jones v. J. Sargent Reynolds

Jones v. J. Sargent Reynolds
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided January 4, 1996

Jones v. J. Sargent Reynolds

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7053

BENJAMIN HENDERSON JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus J. SARGENT REYNOLDS COMMUNITY COLLEGE, its Teachers, Officers, Agents, Attorneys, Proxies, Employees, Affiliates; D. GUILLORY; EDWARD MURRAY; RON ANGELONE; JAMES S. GILMORE, III; DOUGLAS WILDER; GEORGE F. ALLEN, Governor, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-616-AM) Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 4, 1996

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Benjamin Henderson Jones, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Benjamin Jones appeals from a district court order dismissing his complaint without prejudice for failure to amend and particu- larize his complaint and denying his motions for default judgment and a temporary restraining order. We dismiss the appeal.

The district court's dismissal order makes clear that Jones may save his complaint by amendment. Thus, this appeal of that order is interlocutory. Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local 293, 10 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. 1993). Regarding the portion of the order denying Jones's request for a temporary restraining order, a request regarding facts unbound to the substance of the initial complaint, we find no extraordinary circumstances that would merit allowing an interlocutory appeal. Virginia v. Tenneco, Inc., 538 F.2d 1026, 1029-30 (4th Cir. 1976).

Thus, we dismiss Jones's appeal. 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.