Joseph Lagana appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2). * 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Carp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because Lagaña may proceed with his timely claims by amending his complaint to provide a “short and plain” statement of the facts showing his entitlement to relief, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2), the order he seeks to appeal is neither a final order with respect to those claims nor an appeal-able interlocutory or collateral order. 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.