United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 23, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-10513
Conference Calendar
WILLIAM MORRIS RISBY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:04-CV-1414-H
--------------------
Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
William Morris Risby, federal prisoner # 31495-077, has
filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP)
on appeal, following the denial of his motion for appointment of
counsel in a civil action seeking the return of seized property.
We must examine the basis of our jurisdiction sua sponte if
necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987).
Generally, this court’s jurisdiction is limited to final
decisions of district courts. 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The denial of
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 05-10513
-2-
appointed counsel does not conclude litigation and is therefore
not a final decision. Marler v. Adonis Health Prods., 997 F.2d
1141, 1142 (5th Cir. 1993). Risby’s case is a civil action
against the Government. Pena v. United States, 122 F.3d 3, 4
(5th Cir. 1997). As such, this court does not have jurisdiction
over an interlocutory order denying appointment of counsel. See
Marler, 997 F.3d at 1143. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED
for lack of jurisdiction. Risby’s motion for leave to proceed
IFP on appeal is DENIED.