KARIM v. PEARSON (2018)

Salar Omar Karim seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s ^* order granting in part and denying in part, without prejudice, Respondent’s motion to dismiss Karim’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); 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 Karim seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, as one of the claims raised in Karim’s § 2254 petition remains pending in the district court. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   This case was decided by a magistrate judge with the parties’ consent pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012).

PER CURIAM:

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.