Case ID: f-appx_335/html/0354-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Beautanous COOR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Patricia R. STANSBERRY, Respondent-Appellee. Beautanous Coor, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Patricia R. Stansberry, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    Nos. 09-6026, 09-6214.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 22, 2009.
    Decided: June 29, 2009.
    Beautanous Coor, Appellant Pro Se. Robin Elaine Perrin, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
   No. 09-6026 dismissed; No. 09-6214 affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Beauta-nous Coor, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying his motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and for appointment of counsel (No. 09-6026), and appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2006) petition (No. 09-6214).

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Coor seeks to appeal in No. 09-6026 is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss appeal No. 09-6026 for lack of jurisdiction. Coor v. Stansberry, No. 3:08-cv00061-REP (E.D. Va. filed Dec. 12, 2008, entered Dec. 13, 2008).

We affirm No. 09-6214 for the reasons stated by the district court, having reviewed the record and found no reversible error. Coor v. Stansberry, No. 3:08-cv-00061-REP (E.D. Va. filed Dec. 31, 2008). 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.

No. 09-6026 DISMISSED.

No. 09-6214 AFFIRMED.