Fulford-El v. Waters , 71 F. App'x 285 ( 2003 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6785
ERROL DOUGLASS FULFORD-EL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LLOYD L. WATERS, Warden; JAMES YONKER;
JACQUELEN SHANK; CAPTAIN SOTALMYER; J. LYNCH;
JAMES PEGUESS, Warden; SARGEANT MYERS; K. O.
WILLIAMS, Lieutenant; CLARK JENTY,
Correctional Officer II; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER
COOPER; SARGEANT HANCOCK; GARY FOREMAN,
Lieutenant; WILLIAM W. SONDERVAN; MARVIN N.
ROBBINS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge.
(CA-03-1254-WDQ)
Submitted: August 14, 2003 Decided: August 21, 2003
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Errol Douglass Fulford-El, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Errol Douglass Fulford-El appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice.
The district court dismissed the complaint because Fulford-El did
not comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8, requiring a short and plain
statement of his claims. Because Fulford-El may cure this defect
by amending his complaint, the dismissal without prejudice is not
a final, appealable order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers
Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). We
therefore dismiss the appeal.* We deny Fulford-El’s motion for
transfer to another institution. 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
*
To the extent Fulford-El attempts to appeal orders from
Fulford-El v. Robbins, No. CA-03-1200-1, this appeal was separately
docketed, and Fulford-El filed a motion to dismiss, which was
granted. Therefore, we do not consider those orders.
2