Court Opinion

ID: 8674628
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-25 01:25:18.970754+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:23.779867
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
Michael Scott Perkinson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, *15328 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Perkinson seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Miller v. Simmons, 814 F.2d 962, 964-67 (4th Cir.1987). 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.