
    Wayne A. GARRETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rufus FLEMING, Regional Director; D.A. Garraghty, Chief Warden, Virginia Department of Corrections; J.D. Oates, III, Medical Administrator, Virginia Department of Corrections; Doctor Shaw; Doctor Bhuller, M.D., Orthopedics; Robert C. Wrenn, Clerk, Circuit Court of the County of Greensville, Defendants-Appellees, and Ronald Angelone, Director; Donald Swetter, Doctor, Medical Director, Greensville Correctional Center; Greensville Correctional Center; S. Robinson, Lieutenant, Correctional Officer; A. Millner; Commonwealth of Virginia; Robert G. O’Hara, Judge, Circuit Court of the County of Greensville, Defendants. Wayne A. Garrett, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donald Swetter, Doctor, Medical Director, Greensville Correctional Center; A. Millner, Defendants-Appellees, and Ronald Angelone, Director; Rufus Fleming, Regional Director; D.A. Garraghty, Chief Warden, Virginia Department of Corrections; J.D. Oates, III, Medical Administrator, Virginia Department of Corrections; Greensville Correctional Center; S. Robinson, Lieutenant, Correctional Officer; Doctor Shaw; Doctor Bhuller, M.D., Orthopedics; Commonwealth of Virginia; Robert G. O’Hara, Judge, Circuit Court of the County of Greensville; Robert C. Wrenn, Clerk, Circuit Court of the County of Greensville, Defendants.
    Nos. 03-6327, 03-6502.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted July 31, 2003.
    Decided Aug. 11, 2003.
    Wayne A. Garrett, Appellant Pro Se. William W. Muse, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Michael John Otten, Leclair Ryan, P.C., Richmond, Virginia; Edward Joseph McNelis, III, John David McChesney, Rawls & McNelis, P.C., Richmond, Virginia; John Adrian Gibney, Jr., Thompson & McMullan, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before WIDENER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Wayne A. Garrett seeks to appeal the orders granting motions to dismiss and for summary judgment as to some, but not all, defendants. 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 orders that Garrett seeks to appeal do not dispense with all claims as to all parties. Therefore, the orders are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Garrett’s motion for a stay pending appeal. 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.  