UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7431
BILLY G. ASEMANI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
THE GOVERNMENT OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN;
THE SUPREME LEADER OF THE ISLAMIC REVOLUTION
KHAMENEI; THE ISLAMIC REVOLUTIONARY COURT; THE
MINISTRY OF INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY; THE
COUNSEL OF GUARDIANS; THE MINISTRY OF ISLAMIC
CULTURE AND GUIDANCE; THE ISLAMIC
REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS CORPS; ALI FALLAHIAN-
KHUZESTANI; HOFFATOL-ISLAM NAYERRI,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge.
(1:07-cv-01615)
Submitted: March 3, 2008 Decided: May 6, 2008
Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Billy G. Asemani, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Billy G. Asemani appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his complaint without prejudice in this action filed
under 18 U.S.C. § 2333 (2000). Although an order dismissing a
complaint without prejudice generally is not an appealable order,
see Chao v. Rivendell Woods, Inc., 415 F.3d 342, 345 (4th Cir.
2005), the district court’s order nonetheless qualifies as a final
order subject to appeal because the action cannot be saved by
merely amending the complaint. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar
Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993)
(holding appellate court may evaluate particular grounds for
dismissal to determine whether plaintiff could save action by
merely amending complaint).
The district court properly found Asemani failed to
establish he was a national of the United States under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1101(a)(22) (2000). We therefore conclude the district court
correctly decided Asemani lacked standing to proceed under 18
U.S.C. § 2333(a) (2000). Accordingly, we affirm the district
court’s order. We deny Asemani’s motions for oral argument and for
appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
- 2 -
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -