Case Name: Robert WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; Warden Rowley; Ms. Walker, Officer; Sergeant Johnson; Sergeant Warner; Sergeant Cross; Sergeant Thomas; J. Frantz, Officer, in their official capacity, Defendants-Appellees, and Officer Frezel, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-09-16
Citations: 346 F. App'x 974
Docket Number: No. 09-7370
Parties: Robert WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; Warden Rowley; Ms. Walker, Officer; Sergeant Johnson; Sergeant Warner; Sergeant Cross; Sergeant Thomas; J. Frantz, Officer, in their official capacity, Defendants—Appellees, and Officer Frezel, Defendant.
Judges: Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 346
Pages: 974–975

Head Matter:
Robert WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; Warden Rowley; Ms. Walker, Officer; Sergeant Johnson; Sergeant Warner; Sergeant Cross; Sergeant Thomas; J. Frantz, Officer, in their official capacity, Defendants—Appellees, and Officer Frezel, Defendant.
No. 09-7370.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 10, 2009.
Decided: Sept. 16, 2009.
Robert Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Williams, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion for appointment of counsel and his motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. In denying the temporary restraining order, the district court noted that Williams failed to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable harm or any of the other requirements necessary to obtain preliminary injunctive relief. Williams timely appealed.
This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 91 (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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Williams' appeal of the district court's denial of appointment of counsel and of a temporary restraining order, are neither final orders nor appeal-able interlocutory or collateral orders. To the extent the district court denied a preliminary injunction, which is an appealable order, we conclude that denial was not an abuse of discretion. See Ciena Corp. V. Jarrará, 203 F.3d 312, 322 (4th Cir.2000).
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.