Case Name: Cargyle Brown SOLOMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shareese KESS-LEWIS; Randolph T. Lewis, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-07-31
Citations: 580 F. App'x 186
Docket Number: No. 14-1397
Parties: Cargyle Brown SOLOMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shareese KESS-LEWIS; Randolph T. Lewis, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 580
Pages: 186–187

Head Matter:
Cargyle Brown SOLOMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shareese KESS-LEWIS; Randolph T. Lewis, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-1397.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 29, 2014.
Decided: July 31, 2014.
Cargyle Brown Solomon, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Cargyle Brown Solomon seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her complaint without prejudice. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). "[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement." Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S. Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).
The district court's order was entered on the docket on August 13, 2013. The notice of appeal was filed on April 2, 2014. Because Solomon failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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.
DISMISSED.
Although a dismissal without prejudice generally is interlocutory and not appealable, we conclude that the order dismissing Solomon's complaint is an appealable final order as no amendment to the complaint could cure the defects identified by the district court. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).