Francisco Masias seeks to appeal the district courts orders denying his motion to appoint counsel and motion for reconsideration. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; 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 orders Masias seeks to appeal are neither final nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. And, although the district court subsequently dismissed the underlying case, the doctrine of cumulative finality does not cure this jurisdictional defect because the orders could not have been certified for immediate appeal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). See Williamson v. Stirling, 912 F.3d 154, 170 (4th Cir. 2018). Accordingly, we dismiss the 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
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.