USCA4 Appeal: 24-7151 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/29/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-7151

KARL C. MITCHELL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

THE ATTORNEY GENERALS,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Rossie David Alston, Jr., District Judge. (1:24-cv-00232-RDA-IDD)

Submitted: January 23, 2025 Decided: January 29, 2025

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Karl C. Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-7151 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/29/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Karl C. Mitchell seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his

complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and permitting him to

file an amended complaint. This court 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).

“[A]n order that dismisses a complaint with leave to amend is not a final decision because

it means that the district court is not finished with the case.” Britt v. DeJoy,

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

The district court granted Mitchell leave to amend and, further, granted him an

extension of time to do so. Accordingly, the order Mitchell seeks to appeal is neither a

final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See

(explaining

that “a plaintiff who wishes to stand on h[is] complaint should request that the district court

enter a final decision dismissing h[is] case without leave to amend”). We therefore 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