Opinion
No. 10-50487 Summary Calendar.
January 11, 2011.
Joe Angel Acosta, III, Lovelady, TX, pro se.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, USDC No. 5:10-CV-101.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Joe Angel Acosta, III, Texas prisoner # 1408833, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against a number of prison personnel from several different facilities as well as administrative personnel, asserting claims for denial of procedural due process, equal protection, and adequate medical care and deliberate indifference to his safety. The district court dismissed the claims against some of the defendants without prejudice for failure to state a claim. The district court noted, and its docket sheet reflects, that claims remain pending against numerous defendants.
Because the district court dismissed some but not all claims and defendants, we must sua sponte examine whether we have jurisdiction to consider the appeal. See Martin v. Halliburton, 618 F.3d 476, 481 (5th Cir. 2010). We have jurisdiction over appeals from (1) final orders pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291; (2) orders that are deemed final due to a jurisprudential exception, such as the collateral order doctrine; (3) interlocutory orders specified in 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a); and (4) interlocutory orders that are properly certified for appeal by the district court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) or § 1292(b). Dardar v. Lafourche Realty Co., 849 F.2d 955, 957 (5th Cir. 1988); Save the Bay, Inc. v. U.S. Army, 639 F.2d 1100, 1102 n. 3 (5th Cir. 1981). The order from which Acosta appeals does not fall within any of these categories, so we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal, and the appeal is DISMISSED.
Acosta's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED. His motion for appointment of counsel is also DENIED. See Schwander v. Blackburn, 750 F.2d 494, 502-03 (5th Cir. 1985).