Walter Duane White seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for the appointment of counsel and his motion for a preliminary injunction in this Bivens * action. 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 — 16, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The court’s denial of White’s motion for appointment of counsel is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss that portion of White’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. As for the denial White’s motion for a preliminary injunction, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. White v. Claudius, No. 5:09-ct-03191-D (E.D.N.C. Apr. 6, 2010). 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.

*927 DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.