David Henderson v. Henry Paulson
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
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)
November 13, 2008
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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. * error. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible See Va.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. v. Paulson, No. 1:08-cv-00556-TSE-JFA (E.D.
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
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.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?