916 F.2d 710
John Carl ROES, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Theodore R. ESCHENBURG, Sr., Associate Judge, Defendant-Appellee.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 1, 1990.
Decided Oct. 23, 1990.
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Herbert F. Murray, Senior District Judge. (CA-90-697-HM)
John Carl Roes, appellant pro se.
Before DONALD RUSSELL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
John Carl Roes appeals an order of the district court which denied his request for appointment of counsel in this civil rights action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 this Court has jurisdiction over appeals from final orders. A final order is one which disposes of all issues in dispute as to all parties. It "ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment." Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945).
As the order appealed from is not a final order, it is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291. Nor is the order appealable as a collateral order under Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949).
Finding no basis for appellate jurisdiction,* we dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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.
Roes has also failed to file a corporate disclosure statement as parties in civil appeals are required to do. 4th CIR.R. 47(c)