Case Name: Thomasina C. LACEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-05-01
Citations: 472 F. App'x 158
Docket Number: No. 11-2358
Parties: Thomasina C. LACEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 472
Pages: 158–158

Head Matter:
Thomasina C. LACEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 11-2358.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 23, 2012.
Decided: May 1, 2012.
Thomasina C. Lacey, Appellant Pro Se. Hope B. Eastman, Arthur G. House, Paley, Rothman, Goldstein, Rosenberg, Eig & Cooper, Chtd, Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Thomasina C. Lacey seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice her employment discrimination complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. See 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because Lacey could amend her complaint to cure the defects identified by the district court, the order she seeks to appeal is interlocutory and not appealable. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.