UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7231

CHRISTOPHER LEONARD OLSZOWY; ANNA OLSZOWY,

Plaintiffs – Appellants,

v.

BERKELEY COUNTY SUMMARY COURTS; WAYNE DEWITT, Sheriff, Berkeley County; RICHARD DRIGGERS, Major,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

JOSEPH STEPHEN SCHMUTZ; BERKELEY COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; OFFICER OF THE SOLICITOR NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT; BERKELEY COUNTY CLERK OF COURT; 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.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Bristow Marchant, Magistrate Judge. (9:09-cv-01662-JMC-BM)

Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: December 2, 2010

Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Leonard Olszowy, Anna Olszowy, Appellants Pro Se. Harry V. Ragsdale, CORRIGAN & CHANDLER, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Christopher and Anna Olszowy seek to appeal the

district court order denying their motion for appointment of

counsel. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final

orders,

(2006), and certain interlocutory and

collateral orders,

(2006); Fed. R. Civ. P.

54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,

(1949). The order the Olszowys’ seek to appeal is

neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or

collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction. Further, we deny their motion for a change of

venue and to suspend briefing. 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

3