Barbour v. State of Maryland

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6766 KEVIN M. BARBOUR, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Brock- bridge Correctional Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-96- 1013-AMD) Submitted: June 28, 1996 Decided: August 14, 1996 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kevin M. Barbour, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) action for failure to either allege that he forewarned Defendants or other prison offi- cials that he was in danger, or provide evidence of a risk of harm to Appellant to which Defendants were deliberately indifferent. A dismissal without prejudice is generally not appealable "unless the grounds for dismissal clearly indicate that `no amendment [in the complaint] could cure the defects in the [Appellant's] case.'" See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. 1993) (quoting Coniston Corp. v. Village of Hoffman Estates, 844 F.2d 461, 463 (7th Cir. 1988)). Because the district court's reason for dismissing the action did not clearly indicate that no amendment could cure the defect, we dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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 2