appeal. The district court’s denial of Interstate’s motion to dissolve the stay was a refusal to consider any issue on the merits of the case. It was not a collateral order concerning an injunction appealable under § 1292(a)(1). ? order denying the motion to dissolve the stay, however, is itself an ap-pealable order. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 11-13, 103 S.Ct. 927, 934-35, 74 L.Ed.2d 765. An order denying a motion to dissolve a stay is equivalent to an order granting a stay of litigation and the Supreme Court in Moses Cone held that a district court order granting a stay of litigation pursuant to Colorado River is an appealable order. Id. Compare Gulf-Stream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., - U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 1133, 99 L.Ed.2d 296 (<HOLDING>). The Court found that an order granting a stay
holding that a district court order denying a motion to stay or dismiss because of the pendency of similar litigation in state court is not immediately appealable under section 1291 or section 1292a1 holding that order denying motion to dismiss a bankruptcy petition is final under 28 usc  1291 holding that denial of counsel in section 1983 action is not immediately appealable holding prejudgment denial of motion to dismiss on basis of forumselection clause not to be immediately appealable under  1291 holding an order of rule 37a sanctions against an attorney is immediately appealable under  1291