Carla T. Lewis seeks to appeal the district courts order dismissing her civil complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; 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). “[D]ismissals without prejudice generally are not appealable ‘unless the grounds for dismissal clearly indicate that no amendment in the complaint could cure the defects in the plaintiffs case.’ ” Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 610 (4th Cir. 2020) (quoting Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Loc. Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. 1993)). Because the district court recognized the possibility that amendment could cure the defects in Lewis’ complaint, id. at 610-11, we conclude that the courts order is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the district court with instructions to allow Lewis to amend the complaint. We deny Lewis’ “motion to stable probate.” 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 AND REMANDED
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.