USCA4 Appeal: 21-7177 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/05/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-7177
JEFFREY CORPORAL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LIEUTENANT PENNINGTON; OFFICER DONALDSON; BUTLER, Assistant
Warden; WARDEN WEBER; ARNOLD, Security Chief; COMMISSIONER HILL;
SECRETARY GREEN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (1:20-cv-03357-DKC)
Submitted: December 12, 2022 Decided: January 5, 2023
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DIAZ, Circuit Judge, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey Corporal, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-7177 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/05/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey Corporal appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to
dismiss or for summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Before addressing the
merits of Corporal’s appeal, we first must be assured that we have jurisdiction. Porter v.
Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015). We 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, 545-47 (1949).
“Ordinarily, a district court order is not final until it has resolved all claims as to all parties.”
Porter, 803 F.3d at 696 (internal quotation marks omitted).
Our review of the record reveals that the district court did not adjudicate all of the
claims raised in Corporal’s complaint. Specifically, the court failed to address Corporal’s
allegations that his First Amendment rights were violated when Donaldson withheld
permissible paperback books because Corporal refused to acquiesce to the destruction of
his allegedly prohibited hardcover book and subsequently continued to withhold the
paperback books in retaliation for Corporal filing a grievance. Because the order Corporal
seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order,
we lack jurisdiction over the appeal.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the district
court for consideration of the unresolved claims. 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