UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1711
DAVID E. HENDERSON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
HENRY PAULSON, Secretary of Treasury,
Defendant – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:08-cv-00556-TSE-JFA)
Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 18, 2008
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David E. Henderson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David E. Henderson appeals the district court's order
dismissing without prejudice his claims seeking money damages
from Defendant for allegedly violating the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (2006), and the Privacy Act, 5
U.S.C. § 552a(g) (2006), and for failing to provide him his last
paycheck. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See
Henderson v. Paulson, No. 1:08-cv-00556-TSE-JFA (E.D. Va.
June 2, 2008). 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.
AFFIRMED
*
Generally, dismissals without prejudice are not
appealable. Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union
392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066 (4th Cir. 1993). A dismissal without
prejudice could be final, however, if no amendment to the
complaint could cure the defects in the plaintiff's case. Id.
at 1066-67; see also Chao v. Rivendell Woods, Inc., 415 F.3d
342, 345 (4th Cir. 2005) (holdings that orders dismissing
actions without prejudice are appealable). We find that the
district court's order is a final, appealable order because the
defects in Henderson’s complaint must be cured by something more
than an amendment to the complaint.
2