
    Clarence Everett JONES, Sr., individually and on behalf of all present and future inmates in the Dorchester County Jails in Summerville, South Carolina and in St. George, South Carolina, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. John R. BARNES, Jail Administrator; A. Pastor, Captain, Detention Center Commander; S. Green, First Lieutenant and Detention Supervisor; J. Washington, First Lieutenant and Administrative Officer; L. Carmichael, Lieutenant; C. Heyward, Lieutenant; S. Everett, Lieutenant; L. Haynes, Lieutenant and Jail Team Commander; Dorchester County; Randy Scott, Chairman; Skip Elliot; Chris Murphy; Larry Hargett; Richard Rosebrock, Dorchester County Council Member; Ray Nash, Dorchester County Sheriff; Tara Richardson, City Magistrate of Dorchester County in her official capacity, Chairman, Defendants—Appellees, and Kerry Mitchell Carn, individually, Defendant.
    No. 05-1603.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 29, 2005.
    Decided: Sept. 16, 2005.
    Clarence Everett Jones, Sr., Appellant pro se. James Albert Stuckey, Jr., Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Clarence Everett Jones, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying an extension of the discovery period and dismissing one defendant in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. 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 Jones 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  