
    Christopher Leonard OLSZOWY; Anna Olszowy, Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. Joseph Stephen SCHMUTZ; Berkeley County Sheriff’s Department; Officer of The Solicitor Ninth Judicial Circuit; Berkeley County Clerk Of Court; Berkeley County Summary Courts; Goose Creek Magistrate; South Carolina Bar Association; John H. Price, Jr.; J. Westcoat Sandlin; O Grady Query; Michael P. O’connell; Natalie Parker Bluestein; Constance Mills; Mary P. Brown; Scarlett A. Wilson; John Church, Solicitor, Defendants—Appellees, and Wayne Dewitt, Sheriff, Berkeley County; Richard Driggers, Major, Defendants.
    No. 09-8064.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 20, 2010.
    Decided: May 25, 2010.
    Christopher Leonard Olszowy, Anna Olszowy, Appellants Pro Se. Harry V. Ragsdale, Corrigan & Chandler, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Leonard Olszowy and Anna Olszowy seek to appeal the district court’s order adopting in part and rejecting in part the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss the Olszowys’ claims against all but two Defendants. 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. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order the Olszow-ys’ seek 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.  