Case Name: Dani DALAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary D. MAYNARD, Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; Charles Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-04-23
Citations: 60 F. App'x 975
Docket Number: No. 03-6280
Parties: Dani DALAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary D. MAYNARD, Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; Charles Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 60
Pages: 975–975

Head Matter:
Dani DALAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary D. MAYNARD, Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; Charles Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 03-6280.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 7, 2003.
Decided April 23, 2003.
Dani Dalai, Appellant pro se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Dani Dalai seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order denying his motion for appointment of counsel and an interpreter and the district court's order denying his motion for discovery. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); 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 orders Dalai seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. 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.