Case ID: f-appx_668/html/0072-02.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

Jason SCOTT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden J. T. SHARTLE, named as FCC Warden; Susan G. McClintock, named as USP Warden, Tucson, AZ; Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 16-6653
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: August 18, 2016
    Decided: August 23, 2016
    
      Jason T. Scott, Appellant Pro Se,
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jason Scott seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying several preliminary motions and setting the schedule for submissions in Scott’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. 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 Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Scott seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis; deny Scott’s motion for injunc-tive relief pending appeal and his petition for a writ of mandamus or, alternatively, for default judgment; and 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 
      
       Scott asserts in his petition for a writ of mandamus that the district court has unduly delayed ruling on his § 2254 petition. Our review of the present record reveals no such delay.