United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-50751

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee, 

versus

Jimmy Zavala, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:04-CR-425-2 

______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges. 

Per Curiam:*

Jimmy Zavala, federal inmate # 49053-180, appeals the denial of his 

motion to correct the record relating to the appeal of his fifth 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 motion attacking his 2005 convictions for various drug, firearms, 

money laundering, and conspiracy offenses. Zavala also moves to 

supplement the record on appeal with various documents relating to his 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 17, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-50751 Document: 00516681036 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/17/2023
No. 22-50751

2

criminal case and to withdraw the memorandum he filed in support of his 

motion to supplement the record.

“[W]e must consider the basis of our own jurisdiction, sua sponte if 

necessary.” Perez v. Stephens, 784 F.3d 276, 280 (5th Cir. 2015). Our 

appellate jurisdiction extends to “appeals from all final decisions of the 

district courts of the United States,” 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (emphasis added), as 

well as a limited number of appealable interlocutory orders, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1292(a). The denial of Zavala’s motion to correct the record, which related 

to his already-resolved appeal in another case, was not an appealable final 

order because it did not end the litigation of his prior § 2255 motion on the 

merits. See Cunningham v. Hamilton Cnty., Ohio, 527 U.S. 198, 204 (1999). 

Nor did it constitute an appealable interlocutory order. Moreover, because 

we have previously resolved Zavala’s appeal of the denial of his fifth § 2255 

motion, the issues raised in his motion to correct are now moot. See United 

States v. Heredia-Holguin, 823 F.3d 337, 340 (5th Cir. 2016); United States v. 

Zavala, No. 22-50318 (5th Cir. Nov. 18, 2022) (unpublished panel order).

Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 

Zavala’s motions to supplement the record and to withdraw the 

memorandum in support of his motion to supplement the record are

DENIED.

Since 2008, Zavala has unsuccessfully challenged the validity of his 

2005 convictions through repeated, and often repetitive and successive 

§ 2255 motions and attendant postjudgment and discovery motions. 

Recently, a panel of this court warned Zavala that filing frivolous, repetitive, 

or otherwise abusive pleadings could result in the imposition of sanctions. 

See Zavala, No. 22-50318. Zavala is again WARNED that filing frivolous, 

repetitive, or otherwise abusive pleadings in this court or any court subject to 

this court’s jurisdiction could result in the imposition of sanctions, including 

Case: 22-50751 Document: 00516681036 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/17/2023
No. 22-50751

3

dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his ability to file pleadings 

in this court or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction.

Case: 22-50751 Document: 00516681036 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/17/2023