Townsend v. Baskerville

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7514

BRUCE E. KENNEY; MILTON TOWNSEND,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

and

JAMES W. TAYLOR,

Plaintiff,

versus

ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden; THOMAS F. NEUMAYER; DOROTHY COLLINS, Chief, Operations of Classification & Records Unit; SHANDA DAWKINS, Senior Counselor/Program Supervisor; P.E. ANDERSON, Corporal, Correctional Officer; P.M. HENICK, Regional Ombudsman; SARGEANT LEE; OFFICER WEST, CAPTAIN SCOTT; OFFICER MULLINS; LIEUTENANT BEST; MIKE MORLEY, Chaplain,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-549)

Submitted: August 25, 2005 Decided: August 30, 2005

Before TRAXLER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruce E. Kenney, Milton Townsend, Appellants Pro Se. Susan Foster Barr, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

Bruce E. Kenney and Milton Townsend seek to appeal the

district court’s order dismissing several claims and defendants in

their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. The order did not dismiss

all parties and claims. This court may exercise jurisdiction only

over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain

interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000). See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337

U.S. 541 (1949). The order Kenney and Townsend seek to appeal is

neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral

order. 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

- 3 -