
    William F. MARTIN, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ross Alan BURTON, Public Defender Attorney of the Commission Office of Indigent Defense Sixteenth Judicial Circuit to be sued in this Individual and Official Capacity, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 12-1895.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Oct. 11, 2012.
    Decided: Oct. 15, 2012.
    William F. Martin, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
    Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William F. Martin, Jr., appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and dismissing without prejudice Martin’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. On appeal, we confíne our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Martin’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Martin has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       While dismissals without prejudice generally are interlocutory and not appealable, a dismissal without prejudice may be final if no amendment to the complaint can cure the defect in the plaintiff's case. Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.1993). On the available record, we conclude that the defect identified by the district court cannot be cured by an amendment to the complaint and that the order therefore is appealable.
     