Case Name: Lawrence Verline WILDER, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Steve PRESTON, Secretary, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; John Bravacos, Regional Director; James Kelly, Field Office Director, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-06-05
Citations: 326 F. App'x 172
Docket Number: No. 09-1161
Parties: Lawrence Verline WILDER, Sr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Steve PRESTON, Secretary, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; John Bravacos, Regional Director; James Kelly, Field Office Director, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 326
Pages: 172–172

Head Matter:
Lawrence Verline WILDER, Sr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Steve PRESTON, Secretary, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; John Bravacos, Regional Director; James Kelly, Field Office Director, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 09-1161.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 28, 2009.
Decided: June 5, 2009.
Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court's order denying without prejudice his motion for appointment of counsel in an ongoing civil action. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Wilder 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.