United States v. Reyes

131 F. App'x 965

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Alejandro Reyes appeals from the district court’s order dismissing one of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) claims but retaining jurisdiction over his remaining claims. This court has jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). A final decision is one that “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, 65 S.Ct. 631, 89 L.Ed. 911 (1945). When a district court dismisses fewer than all claims as to the order, it is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Baird v. Palmer, 114 F.3d 39, 42 (4th Cir.1997).

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.

DISMISSED