Opinion ID: 172715
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: jurisdiction

Text: Defendants argue we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the district court’s order is not final under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 as it does not dispose of all of White’s claims. They also assert we lack interlocutory appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) because the district court declined to certify its order. Finally, Defendants claim we lack jurisdiction over White’s appeal of the denial of his motions for a TRO because the denial of a TRO is ordinarily not appealable. We agree the district court’s order is not a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because it did not dispose of all of White’s claims. See D&H Marketers, Inc. v. Freedom Oil & Gas, Inc., 744 F.2d 1443, 1444 (10th Cir. 1984) (en banc) (a final order under § 1291 terminates “all matters as to all parties and causes of action”). We also agree that the denial of a TRO is ordinarily not appealable. See Populist Party v. Herschler, 746 F.2d 656, 661 n.2 (10th Cir. 1984). However, White sought both a TRO and a preliminary injunction. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), we have “jurisdiction [over] 4 appeals from . . . [i]nterlocutory orders of the district courts of the United States . . . granting, continuing, modifying, refusing or dissolving injunctions . . . except where a direct review may be had in the Supreme Court.” “[A]n interlocutory order expressly granting or denying injunctive relief fits squarely within the plain language of [§] 1292(a)(1).” Tri-State Generation & Transmission Ass’n v. Shoshone River Power, Inc., 874 F.2d 1346, 1351 (10th Cir. 1989). Therefore, we lack jurisdiction to review the court’s order to the extent it denies White’s motions for a TRO but have jurisdiction to review the order to the extent it denies his motions for a preliminary injunction. See Kikumura v. Hurley, 242 F.3d 950, 955 n.2 (10th Cir. 2001) (concluding appellate jurisdiction existed only to review the denial of the preliminary injunction although plaintiff had requested both a preliminary injunction and TRO in the district court).