# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 24

- 60273

**____________ Ikechukwu Hyginius Okorie,** 
Plaintiff

— Appellant **,**

versus
**First Bank; Eileen N. Shaffer; Timothy Matthew Farris,** 
Defendants

— Appellees **,**

**______________________________ Ikechukwu Hyginus Okorie,** 
Plaintiff

— Appellant **,**

versus
**Wells Fargo Bank; Erno D. Lindner,**
Defendants

— Appellees

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC Nos. 2:24

- CV

- 46, 2:24

- CV

- 61

**______________________________** Before **Jolly ,**  **Graves ,**  and **Oldham ,**  Circuit Judges

**.** United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 27, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 24-60273 Document: 50-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/27/2024No. 24

- 60273

2 **Per Curiam :**  ***** This appeal involves a pro se litigant’s bankruptcy proceedings. The orders he appeals are interlocutory, and thus, we cannot review them. As such, the appeal is dismissed.

**I.** The plaintiff

- appellant, Ikechukwu Okorie, filed two separate but substantially identical complaints against defendant

- appellees First Bank, Eileen Shaffer, Timothy Farris, Wells Fargo, and Erno Lindner in federal district court . Both c omplaints arise from the same underlying b ankruptcy

c ase and expressly state that “[t]he dispute forming the substance of this action is based on [the underlying b ankruptcy c ase].” The c omplaints were assigned to the same district judge.
The defendant

- a ppellees filed a Joint Motion to Consolidate Related Cases , which Okorie opposed

. The d istrict c ourt granted defendant

a ppellees’ motion in the Consolidation Order. That same day, the d istrict

c ourt, in response to First Bank’s Motion for Referral to Bankruptcy Court and “sua sponte for case management purposes,” issued the Referral Order thereby “refer[ing] the consolidated cases to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.”

**II.** Okorie appeals both the Consolidation Order and the Referral Order. Both orders, however, are interlocutory , since there is no final judgment. The Consolidation Order is “not [a] final judgment[] for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1291; [is] not among the type of orders listed in § 1292(a); [was] not certified by the district court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) or 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) to be final appealable orders; [and it does] not fall within a jurisprudential exception, such as the collateral

- order doctrine, that would

**_____________________**

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

**. R** 

**.** 47.5. Case: 24-60273 Document: 50-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/27/2024No. 24

- 60273

3 render [it a] final, appealable order.” Hale v. United States , 698 F. App’x 211 (5th Cir. 2017). Similarly, t he Referral Order “merely refers [t]his case to the bankruptcy court for further proceedings

- clearly indicating that the referral is only a preliminary step in [this] lawsuit.” Higdon v. Hensley , 49 F.3d 728 (5th Cir. 1995) (quotations omitted). Thus, the Referral Order “does not end the litigation on the merits . . . [rather,] it expressly indicates that litigation on the merits will resume in the bankruptcy court.” Id.

**III.**In sum, this Court cannot review the Consolidation Order nor the Referral Order because they are interlocutory. Accordingly, the appeal is, in all respects,
DISMISSED. Case: 24-60273 Document: 50-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/27/2024