Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alan B. FABIAN, Defendant-Appellant, Jackie Fabian, Claimant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-04
Citations: 414 F. App'x 559
Docket Number: No. 10-1791
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alan B. FABIAN, Defendant-Appellant, Jackie Fabian, Claimant-Appellant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 414
Pages: 559–560

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alan B. FABIAN, Defendant-Appellant, Jackie Fabian, Claimant-Appellant.
No. 10-1791.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 28, 2011.
Decided: March 4, 2011.
Alan B. Fabian, Jackie Fabian, Appellants Pro Se. Jonathan Biran, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jackie and Alan Fabian seek to appeal the district court's order granting the Government's emergency motion, clarifying that the final order of forfeiture did not extinguish the lien on a parcel of real property, and noting that contingent relief may be appropriate depending on the outcome of the collateral litigation. 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., 387 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order the Fabians seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny the Fabians' motion for appointment of counsel 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.