
    Kendall R. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VERIZON WASHINGTON, DC, INCORPORATED; Verizon Mid-Atlantic, Incorporated; Verizon Communications, Incorporated; Reed Smith LLP, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 11-2392.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 29, 2012.
    Decided: April 2, 2012.
    Kendall R. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Helenanne Connolly, Reed Smith, LLP, Falls Church, Virginia; Betty S.W. Graumlich, Reed Smith, LLP, Richmond, Virginia; Angela Avis Holland, Reed Smith, LLP, Washington, DC, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Kendall R. Smith filed an employment discrimination action against Verizon Washington, DC, Incorporated (“Verizon DC”), and other defendants. He now seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing all parties except Verizon DC; dismissing three claims against Verizon DC with prejudice; dismissing the remaining claims against Verizon DC without prejudice; and granting Smith leave to file an amended complaint as to these remaining claims. Smith has filed an amended complaint below. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Smith seeks 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.  