Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-09-01577/USCOURTS-ca10-09-01577-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bureau of Prisons
Appellee
Timothy Doyle Young
Appellant

Document Text:

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

January 5, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

TIMOTHY DOYLE YOUNG,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BUREAU OF PRISONS,

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 09-1577

(D.C. No. 1:09-CV-02849-BNB)

ORDER

Before O’BRIEN, TYMKOVICH, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

This court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because no final or appealable

order has been entered by the district court. The petitioner states in his notice of

appeal that he is appealing the denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction. 

However, although the magistrate judge did deny the petitioner’s motion for stay,

the district court has not ruled on the petitioner’s motion for a preliminary

injunction. 

If the petitioner intends to appeal the denial of the stay, this court lacks

jurisdiction. Except for proceedings conducted by the magistrate judge on

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), a court of appeals lacks

Appellate Case: 09-1577 Document: 01018342263 Date Filed: 01/05/2010 Page: 1 
-2-

jurisdiction to hear an appeal taken directly from a decision of a magistrate judge. 

See Colorado Building & Construction Trade Council v. B.B. Andersen

Construction Co., 879 F.2d 809 (10th Cir. 1989). 

Moreover, this court has jurisdiction to review only final decisions, 28

U.S.C. § 1291, and specific types of interlocutory orders not applicable here. A

final decision is one that “‘ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for

the court to do but execute the judgment.’” Cunningham v. Hamilton County, 527

U.S. 198, 204 (1999) (quoting Van Cauwenberghe v. Biard, 486 U.S. 517, 521-22

(1988)). 

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Ellen Rich Reiter

Deputy Clerk/Jurisdictional Attorney

Appellate Case: 09-1577 Document: 01018342263 Date Filed: 01/05/2010 Page: 2