J. Doe, as personal representative (PR) v. Augusta University, f/k/a Medical College of Georgia (MCG)

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-1650
J. DOE, as personal representative (PR),
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY, f/k/a Medical College of Georgia (MCG); SELECT
SPECIALTY HOSPITAL - AUGUSTA, INC.; SELECT MEDICAL HOLDINGS
CORP.; GREENWOOD REGIONAL REHABILITATION HOSPITAL; ERIKA
SIMMERMAN MABES, D.O.; JOHN ROE #1 THROUGH JOHN ROE # X;
MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA (MCG),
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Anderson. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (8:23-cv-06873-RMG-WSB)
Submitted: June 25, 2026 Decided: June 29, 2026
Before BENJAMIN and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Doe, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
J. Doe seeks to appeal the district court’s order referring her case back to the
magistrate judge to allow additional time to seek relief from the final judgment based on
her voluntary dismissal of her civil complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) and the magistrate
judge’s order complying with that directive. Doe also moves for reconsideration and the
application of intervening new law to her underlying case. 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 orders Doe seeks to appeal are neither final orders
nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.∗
Accordingly, we deny Doe’s pending motions and 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
∗ Although the district court has since entered a final judgment ruling on Doe’s Rule
60(b) motion, the doctrine of cumulative finality does not cure the jurisdictional defect
because neither order Doe seeks to appeal could have been certified for immediate appeal
by the district court. See Houck v. LifeStore Bank, 41 F.4th 266, 270-71 (4th Cir. 2022).

-- 2 of 2 --