UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6433

MARK CORRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

DIANIA CARMACK, Defendant - Appellee, and

MS. ATKINS; MS. BOLLOT; DR. CERVIE; PITT COUNTY; WILSON COUNTY; SARGEANT BAILEY; OFFICER BARNS; HOWARD ADAMS, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-98-667-5-CT-BR)

Submitted: July 20, 2000 Decided: August 1, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark Corrigan, Appellant Pro Se. Edwin Constant Bryson, Jr., PATTERSON, DILTHEY, CLAY & BRYSON, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Mark Corrigan appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of one, but not all, Defendants named in Corrigan’s action under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, see 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocu- tory and collateral orders. See 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Robinson v. Parke-Davis & Co., 685 F.2d 912, 913 (4th Cir. 1982).

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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