UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6740

JAMES L. JACK, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. MICHAEL L. CHAPMAN, Sheriff, LCSO; SEAN DIKEMAN, #2233, Deputy, LCSO; LIMA, Deputy, LCSO, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 15-7179

JAMES L. JACK, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. MICHAEL L. CHAPMAN, Sheriff, LCSO; SEAN DIKEMAN, #2233, Deputy, LCSO; LIMA, Deputy, LCSO, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Senior District Judge. (3:14-cv-00390-JRS-RCY)

Submitted: October 20, 2015 Decided: October 22, 2015 Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James L. Jack, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: James L. Jack appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice for failure to particularize his complaint. Regarding No. 15-6740, after Jack filed his notice of appeal, the district court vacated the order to afford Jack extra time to respond.

As the challenged order is no longer in force, we dismiss the appeal as moot. Turning to No. 15-7179, because Jack may refile his suit in district court with a particularized complaint, the dismissal order is interlocutory and not appealable. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal as well. 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