Thomas v. Stansberry

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: September 14, 2009
• Docket: 09-6255
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6255

CHARLES THOMAS,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden,

Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:08-cv-01223-LMB-TCB)

Submitted: September 10, 2009 Decided: September 14, 2009

Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Thomas, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Charles Thomas appeals the district court's order

dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2006)

petition. The district court dismissed the petition pursuant to

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) when Thomas failed to correct deficiencies

in his complaint after being ordered to do so by the district

court. Because Thomas may move to reopen his case and file an

amended petition to cure the defects identified by the district

court, we find that the dismissal order is interlocutory and not

appealable. See Chao v. Rivendell Woods, Inc., 415 F.3d 342,

345 (4th Cir. 2005); 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. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED