Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

James Vang seeks to appeal the district court’s order overruling Vang’s objections to the magistrate judge’s order denying his “Motion in Abeyance and/or Stay of Habeas Corpus.” 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Vang seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Vang’s motion for stay pending appeal and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Vang’s motion for a certificate of appealability is denied as unnecessary. 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.