Case Name: David W. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R.C. MATHENA, Warden; J. Kiser, Assistant Warden; Mr. Baker, Psychologist; D. Vass, ICA Classification Director; Central Classification, Name Unknown; John Garmin, Regional Director; Mr. Former, Counselor; Rod Wicker, Chaplain; Major Newberry, Security; Captain Gayheart, Security; Lieutenant Honaker, Security; Sergeant Ratliff; Sergeant White; Reynolds, C/O; J. Vass, Programs; Miller, C/O, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-10
Citations: 416 F. App'x 258
Docket Number: No. 10-7686
Parties: David W. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R.C. MATHENA, Warden; J. Kiser, Assistant Warden; Mr. Baker, Psychologist; D. Vass, ICA Classification Director; Central Classification, Name Unknown; John Garmin, Regional Director; Mr. Former, Counselor; Rod Wicker, Chaplain; Major Newberry, Security; Captain Gayheart, Security; Lieutenant Honaker, Security; Sergeant Ratliff; Sergeant White; Reynolds, C/O; J. Vass, Programs; Miller, C/O, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 416
Pages: 258–258

Head Matter:
David W. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R.C. MATHENA, Warden; J. Kiser, Assistant Warden; Mr. Baker, Psychologist; D. Vass, ICA Classification Director; Central Classification, Name Unknown; John Garmin, Regional Director; Mr. Former, Counselor; Rod Wicker, Chaplain; Major Newberry, Security; Captain Gayheart, Security; Lieutenant Honaker, Security; Sergeant Ratliff; Sergeant White; Reynolds, C/O; J. Vass, Programs; Miller, C/O, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-7686.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 25, 2011.
Decided: March 10, 2011.
David W. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. William W. Muse, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees Ratliff and Miller.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
David W. Williams seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing some of his claims. 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., 837 U.S. 541, 545-6, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Williams seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appeal-able 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.