Court Opinion

ID: 7209612
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-24 18:21:31.577782+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:16:47.330882
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
Michael Mayo appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to appoint counsel in his § 1983 action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); 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 here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as interlocutory and deny Mayo’s motion for appointment of appellate counsel. 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.