Dwayne Freeman v. Sergeant Kim

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Dwayne Freeman v. Sergeant Kim

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1539 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/13/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1539

DWAYNE E. FREEMAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SERGEANT KIM, the Acting Lieutenant; Jailor Sergeant; SERGEANT LAURA, Jailor Sergeant; LIEUTENANT KNIGHT, Lieutenant Jailor,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, Senior District Judge. (1:24-cv-00204-LCB-JEP)

Submitted: October 30, 2024 Decided: January 13, 2025

Before GREGORY, HEYTENS, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dwayne E. Freeman, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-1539 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/13/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Dwayne E. Freeman seeks to appeal the district court’s judgment accepting the

magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing without prejudice Freeman’s

42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders,

28 U.S.C. § 1291

, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders,

28 U.S.C. § 1292

; Fed. R. Civ. P.

54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,

337 U.S. 541, 545-46

(1949). The order

Freeman seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral

order. See Britt v. DeJoy,

45 F.4th 790, 793, 797

(4th Cir. 2022) (en banc) (order)

(explaining that a district court’s “order that dismisses a complaint with leave to amend is

not a final decision” and that plaintiff must either file an amended complaint in the district

court or “request that the district court enter a final decision dismissing [his] case without

leave to amend”). Accordingly, we 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

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished