Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Clemmon Augusta Woodard seeks to appeal the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint without prejudice because he failed to comply with the district court’s order to particularize his complaint. Generally, a district court’s dismissal of a complaint without prejudice is not appealable. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1067 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that “a plaintiff may not appeal the dismissal of his complaint without prejudice unless the grounds for dismissal clearly indicate that no amendment [in the complaint] could cure the defects in the plaintiffs case”) (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted). “However, ... if the grounds of the dismissal make clear that no amendment could cure the defects in the plaintiffs case, the order dismissing the complaint is final in fact and [appellate jurisdiction exists].” Id. at 1066 (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted).

In this case, Woodard may be able to save his action by amending his complaint to comply with the district court’s order to particularize. Therefore, the district court’s dismissal of Woodard’s complaint without prejudice is not an appealable final order. 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 air the decisional process.

DISMISSED.