Terrance Pevie v. KEITH LYONS, Warden, Jessup Correctional Institution, in his individual

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6252
TERRANCE PEVIE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
KEITH LYONS, Warden, Jessup Correctional Institution, in his individual and
official capacity; SCOTT D. SNYDER, Maintenance Manager, in his individual
and official capacity; ALLEN GANG, Chief of Security, in his individual and
official capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:17-cv-01796-TDC)
Submitted: May 16, 2019 Decided: May 21, 2019
Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terrance Pevie, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Terrance Pevie seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary
judgment to one defendant in Pevie’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action and dismissing
some of Pevie’s claims against two other defendants without prejudice. We may exercise
jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and
collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial
Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47 (1949). The district court identified certain
deficiencies in Pevie’s claims against the unserved defendants in their individual
capacities. Because Pevie may be able to cure these defects by filing an amended
complaint, we conclude that the order Pevie seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d
619, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10
F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to
the district court with instructions to allow Pevie to file an amended complaint. Goode,
807 F.3d at 630. We deny Pevie’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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 AND REMANDED

-- 2 of 2 --