USCA4 Appeal: 23-7096 Doc: 14 Filed: 10/04/2024 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7096

ALBERT MARQUAVIOUS LAMAR ANDERSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

GOODSUM, Individual and Official Capacity; PRICE, Individual and Official Capacity; DOUG NEWTON, Individual and Official Capacity; TODD ISHEE, Individual and Official Capacity; YANCY JOHNSON, Individual and Official Capacity; SMITH, Individual and Official Capacity; JONES, Individual and Official Capacity; FLANDERS, Individual and Official Capacity; TAMMY MILIGAN, Individual and Official Capacity; EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Official Capacity,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (1:23-cv-00108-MOC)

Submitted: September 30, 2024 Decided: October 4, 2024

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Albert Anderson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-7096 Doc: 14 Filed: 10/04/2024 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Albert Marquavious Lamar Anderson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing his

complaint without prejudice and providing him 30 days

to file an amended complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Although the parties do not question our jurisdiction, we “have an independent

obligation to verify the existence of appellate jurisdiction.” Williamson v. Stirling,

(4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted). We may exercise

jurisdiction only over final orders,

, and certain interlocutory and

collateral orders,

; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan

Corp.,

(1949).

When a district court dismisses a complaint without prejudice and without leave to

amend, the order dismissing the complaint is final and appealable. Britt v. DeJoy,

(4th Cir. 2022) (en banc). On the other hand, when a district court dismisses a

complaint without prejudice but with leave to amend, that order “is not a final decision

because it means that the district court is not finished with the case.”

. Such an

order is nonfinal even if the plaintiff declines to amend the complaint unless the plaintiff

“request[s] that the district court enter a final decision dismissing [the] case without leave

to amend” and the district court does so.

.

The same rule applies when the district court establishes a deadline to file an

amended complaint and that deadline passes without the filing of an amended complaint.

. In that situation, the district court should “issue a final order upon the

expiration of th[e] deadline.”

. Or the plaintiff can “elect to stand on h[is]

2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-7096 Doc: 14 Filed: 10/04/2024 Pg: 3 of 3

complaint by waiving h[is] right to amend and requesting, and obtaining, a finalized

decision from the district court.”

At bottom, the plaintiff may appeal in that situation

only if the district court has entered an order that ends the proceedings before it.

Here, the district court’s order dismissed Anderson’s complaint without prejudice

and provided him 30 days to file an amended complaint. Anderson did not file an amended

complaint. Nor did he waive his right to amend and ask the district court to issue a final

order so that he could appeal. Moreover, despite the expiration of the 30-day period, the

district court never entered an order terminating the proceedings before it. The order that

Anderson seeks to appeal is thus nonfinal and not appealable.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Anderson’s

“Motion for Restraining Order Injunction Relief.” 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

3