UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6943
ANTHONY BUSSIE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
JUDGE KEENAN; JUDGE FLOYD; JUDGE HARRIS; JUDGE BRITT; JUDGE
BUMB,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:16-cv-00238-RAJ-RJK)
Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 22, 2016
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Bussie, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Bussie seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing without prejudice his petition for a writ of mandamus
for failure to allege sufficient facts in support of his petition.
This court 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). Because
the deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied
by filing an amended petition, we conclude that the order Bussie
seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
interlocutory or collateral 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 this appeal for lack of
jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with
instructions to allow Bussie to amend his petition. See Goode,
807 F.3d at 630. 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