Case Name: Lawrence Verline WILDER, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Secretary Michael LEAVITT; Administrator Kerry Weems; Chair Naomi Earp; Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Chairman Neil Anthony Gordon Mcphie, 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 171
Docket Number: No. 09-1180
Parties: Lawrence Verline WILDER, Sr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Secretary Michael LEAVITT; Administrator Kerry Weems; Chair Naomi Earp; Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Chairman Neil Anthony Gordon Mcphie, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 326
Pages: 171–171

Head Matter:
Lawrence Verline WILDER, Sr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Secretary Michael LEAVITT; Administrator Kerry Weems; Chair Naomi Earp; Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Chairman Neil Anthony Gordon Mcphie, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 09-1180.
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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 placing his motion for appointment of counsel in abeyance pending receipt of a response to Wilder's mandamus petition. 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.