Case ID: f-appx_432/html/0280-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Titus THOMAS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Sgt. MIDDLETON; B.L. Maust, Officer; Imani Green, Inmate, ID 337-646; Jesse Thomas, Inmate, ID 340-968, Defendants—Appellees, v. Office of the Attorney General, Party—in—Interest. Titus Thomas, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Sgt. Middleton; B.L. Maust, Officer; Imani Green, Inmate, ID 337-646; Jesse Thomas, Inmate, ID 340-968, Defendants—Appellees, v. Office of the Attorney General, Party—in—Interest.
    Nos. 11-6041, 11-6120.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 26, 2011.
    Decided: May 31, 2011.
    Titus Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Nichole Cherie Gatewood, Rex Schultz Gordon, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Titus Thomas seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motions for appointment of counsel and for production of documents. 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 orders Thomas seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appeal-able interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals 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.