Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James SCOTT, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-11-23
Citations: 352 F. App'x 823
Docket Number: No. 09-7117
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. James SCOTT, Jr., Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 352
Pages: 823–823

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. James SCOTT, Jr., Defendant—Appellant.
No. 09-7117.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 10, 2009.
Decided: Nov. 23, 2009.
James Scott, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
James Scott, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing two of Scott's 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) claims and referring the third to a magistrate judge for further proceedings. 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 Scott 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.