Sindram v. Robelen

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1093

MICHAEL SINDRAM,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

DOUGLAS B. ROBELEN, State Actor; HON. GERALD BRUCE LEE; PHYLLIS T. WALTON; LISA GRAYSON; U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE; JOHN HACKMAN,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

PATRICIA L. HARRINGTON,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:09-cv-01082-GBL-IDD)

Submitted: April 19, 2011 Decided: April 29, 2011

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Sindram, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Michael Sindram seeks to appeal the district court’s

order directing him to show cause why he should not be enjoined

from filing further actions in that court and denying his

motions for appointment of counsel and for a reasonable

accommodation. 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,

545-47 (1949). The order Sindram 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