UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-2634
JANICE L. NORMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MONTGOMERY COLLEGE; BOARD OF TRUSTEES; AF-
FIRMATIVE ACTION OFFICE; FRANCIS COATES; DOC-
TOR GOLDENBERG; BRIANNE FRIEL; WOMEN’S STUDIES
PROGRAM; WOMEN’S STUDIES SCHOLARSHIP COMMIT-
TEE, Division of English Department; GEORGE
JEFFERSON, at Montgomery College; DISABILITY
SUPPORT SERVICES; FINANCIAL AID OFFICE; JOAN
GOUGH,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA-
98-2520-DKC)
Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: January 5, 1999
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Janice L. Norman, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Wellington Thompson,
Jr., County Attorney, Joanne Robertson, COUNTY ATTORNEY’s OFFICE,
Rockville, Maryland; Darrell Robert VanDeusen, Clifford Bernard
Geiger, KOLLMAN & SHEEHAN, Baltimore, Maryland; Joan Bossman
Gordon, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Janice L. Norman appeals the district court’s order dismissing
without prejudice his complaint alleging a violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101-12213
(West 1995). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final
orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994). Because Norman may be able to
save this action by amending her complaint, the district court’s
order is not an appealable final order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v.
Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064 (4th Cir. 1993) (a
dismissal without prejudice is not reviewable unless the reasons
stated for the dismissal clearly disclose that no amendment to the
complaint could cure its defects). We therefore dismiss the appeal
without prejudice. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
2