Norblad
Norblad v. Veronex Technologies, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
ORDER
The memorandum disposition filed on June 22, 2006 is withdrawn. The memorandum disposition accompanying this order shall be filed in its place.
The Court will not entertain any petitions for rehearing or petitions for rehearing en banc.
MEMORANDUM *
Albin Norblad and Richard Lefor appeal from the district court’s June 10, 2004 Order granting defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint and from the district court’s August 11, 2004 Order denying their motion for reconsideration of the June Order. The August Order explained that “[t]his action was dismissed without prejudice for failure to sufficiently establish scienter.” Because we lack jurisdiction over either Order, we dismiss and remand.
We lack jurisdiction over the June Order because it is not a final, appealable decision. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . The Order dismissed the complaint, not the action. Dismissal of a complaint rather than an action is generally not appealable “ ‘unless circumstances make it clear that the [district] court concluded that the action could not be saved by an amendment of the complaint.’ ” Lopez v. City of Needles, 95 F.3d 20, 22 (9th Cir.1996) (quoting Hoohuli v. Ariyoshi 741…