Adesijuola Ogunjobi appeals the district courts order dismissing his civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court correctly determined that Ogunjobis complaint failed to demonstrate a basis for subject matter jurisdiction. However, the district court erred by dismissing the complaint with prejudice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowners Assn v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC, 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013) (“A dismissal for ․ [a] defect in subject matter jurisdiction[ ] must be one without prejudice, because a court that lacks jurisdiction has no power to adjudicate and dispose of a claim on the merits.”).
Accordingly, we affirm the district courts judgment to the extent that it dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, but vacate the judgment to the extent that the dismissal was with prejudice, and remand to the district court for dismissal of the case without prejudice. We also deny Ogunjobis motions to reverse the dismissal of his complaint and to waive submission of an informal brief. 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.
AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.