Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06045/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06045-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gene Johnson
Appellee
Edward L. Watson
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6045

EDWARD L. WATSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

GENE JOHNSON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, 

District Judge. (1:09-cv-00651-AJT-TRJ)

Submitted: July 22, 2010 Decided: July 30, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward L. Watson, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Theresa Armstrong, 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-6045 Doc: 14 Filed: 07/30/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Edward L. Watson appeals from the district court’s 

order denying his Motion for Scientific Analysis of Untested 

Evidence filed in the course of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) 

proceeding. Because the district court has not yet ruled on the 

remaining claims in Watson’s habeas petition, we dismiss the 

appeal as interlocutory. 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 (1949). The order Watson 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

Appeal: 10-6045 Doc: 14 Filed: 07/30/2010 Pg: 2 of 2