Court Opinion

ID: 8607159
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-24 04:17:09.110798+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:17.270536
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
Charles Lee Mitter seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying his motion to hold his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition in abeyance. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); 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 Mitter 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.