
    Lawrence JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. O’BRIEN, Warden; Captain Wilson; Lieutenant Trees; J. Gilley, Lieutenant; T. Taylor, Correctional Officer; W. Welch, Correctional Officer; J. Baker, Correctional Officer; Correctional Officer Crum; B. Shoemaker, Correctional Officer; S. White, Correctional Officer; L. BISHOP, Correctional Officer; A. O’Quinn, Correctional Officer; T. Robinson, Correctional Officer; R. Smith, Correctional Officer; A. Rutherford, RN, Defendants-Appellees. Lawrence Johnson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. O’Brien, Warden; Captain Wilson; Lieutenant Trees; J. Gilley, Lieutenant; T. Taylor, Correctional Officer; W. Welch, Correctional Officer; J. Baker, Correctional Officer; Correctional Officer Crum; B. Shoemaker, Correctional Officer; S. White, Correctional Officer; L. Bishop, Correctional Officer; A. O’Quinn, Correctional Officer; T. Robinson, Correctional Officer; R. Smith, Correctional Officer; A. Rutherford, RN, Defendants-Appellees.
    Nos. 11-6779, 11-6888.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Nov. 17, 2011.
    Decided: Nov. 23, 2011.
    Lawrence Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. David Lew, Sara Bugbee Winn, Office Of the United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before KING, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lawrence Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion to appoint counsel and laying venue. 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., 387 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The orders Johnson seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Johnson’s motion to appoint 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.  