UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1545
IVA ROBBINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF AGING AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES;
JIM ROTHROCK, Commissioner,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District
Judge. (1:14-cv-00626-LO-TCB)
Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 26, 2015
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Iva Robbins, Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Brown Beckner, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Iva Robbins appeals the district court’s orders
denying, without prejudice, her motion for appointment of
counsel, denying her motion for a temporary restraining order,
and dismissing, without prejudice, * her complaint seeking
injunctive relief against Defendants. Limiting our review to
the issues raised in Robbins’ informal brief, see 4th Cir. R.
34(b), we affirm the district court’s orders. See Robbins v.
Va. Dep’t of Aging & Rehab. Servs., No. 1:14-cv-00626-LO-TCB
(E.D. Va. May 30, 2014; June 6, 2014). We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
*
Generally, dismissals without prejudice are not appealable.
See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d
1064, 1066 (4th Cir. 1993). However, a dismissal without
prejudice could be final if no amendment to the complaint could
cure the defects in the plaintiff’s case. See id. at 1066-67.
We find that the district court’s order is a final, appealable
order because the defects in Robbins’ complaint—failure to
exhaust administrative remedies—must be cured by something more
than an amendment to the complaint. See id.
2