one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b). We have recognized that “[w]e can only reverse a district court’s Rule 54(b) certification if we determine that the district court has abused its discretion.” Fox v. Baltimore Police Dep’t, 201 F.3d 526, 531 (4th Cir.2000). Although we normally “defer to the district court’s initial determination that a judgment is final and no just reason exists for delay[,][w]e must necessarily accord the district court less deference ... when ... the court offers no rationale for its decision to certify.” Id. (citing Braswell Shipyards, Inc. v. Beazer East, Inc., 2 F.3d 1331, 1336 (4th Cir.l993)(<HOLDING>)). Here, the district court failed to specify
holding that a district courts findings under rule 52a are to be liberally construed in support of the district courts judgment recognizing that factual findings were clearly erroneous where the record before the court was simply devoid of any basis for the district courts conclusion recognizing that district courts finding of reasonable suspicion or probable cause based on the totality of the circumstances is ordinarily accorded deference holding that the courts conclusion that transfer was appropriate is to be accorded great deference recognizing that numerous courts have held that where the district courts rule 54b certification is devoid of findings or reasoning in support thereof the deference normally accorded such a certification is nullified