
    Matthew Jamal JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Susan PAMERLEAU, Bexar County Sheriff; A. Banasco, Jail Administrator Chief; San Antonio, Texas; Bexar County Judicial Officials; Bexar County Prosecutorial Officials; Vincent D. Callahan, Attorney; Bexar County, Texas, Defendants-Appellees
    No. 16-50498
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Filed January 17, 2017
    Matthew Jamal Jackson, Pro Se
    Susan A. Bowen, Assistant District Attorney, District Attorney’s Office for the County of Bexar, San Antonio, TX, for Defendants-Appellees Susan Pamerleau, A. Banasco, Bexar County, Texas
    Before OWEN, ELROD, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

“This Court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion, if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). “Federal appellate courts have jurisdiction over appeals only from (1) a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291; (2) a decision that is deemed final due to jurisprudential exception or that has been properly certified as final pursuant to [Rule] 54(b); and (3) interlocutory orders that fall into specific classes, 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a), or that have been properly certified for appeal by the district court, 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).” Askanase v. Livingwell, Inc., 981 F.2d 807, 809-10 (5th Cir. 1993).. “A decision is final when it ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” Id. at 810 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

The notice of appeal in this case designates either the Magistrate Judge’s order to show cause or the report and recommendation that plaintiffs claims be dismissed, neither of which is an appealable final decision. See Donaldson v. Ducote, 373 F.3d 622, 624 (5th Cir. 2004); United States v. Cooper, 135 F.3d 960, 961-63 (5th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, this appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and plaintiffs motion for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis must be denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     