Court Opinion

ID: 8436659
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-04 15:38:50.394385+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:48:43.654296
License: Public Domain

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Christopher and Anna Olszowy seek to appeal the district court order denying their motion for appointment of counsel. 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, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. *8531221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order the Olszowys’ seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Further, we deny their motion for a change of venue and to suspend briefing. 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.