Case ID: f-appx_464/html/0157-01.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

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kalu KALU, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-7126.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 17, 2012.
    Decided: Feb. 7, 2012.
    Kalu Kalu, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before DAVIS, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Kalu Kalu seeks to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to release funds. 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, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Kalu seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral 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 aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED. 
      
       The district court has yet to issue a garnishment disposition order or act upon Kalu’s request for a hearing. We note that, as directed by statute, the district court should not delay the resolution of such matters. See 28 U.S.C. § 3205(c) (2006).