Court Opinion

ID: 9905368
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-29 15:01:56.654995+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:24.786357
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-13059    Document: 16-1     Date Filed: 11/29/2023   Page: 1 of 2

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 23-13059
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       DAVID SAULSBERRY,
                                                     Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
       versus
       BRITNEY ELDER,
       a.k.a. FTN Bae,

                                                   Defendant-Appellee.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Florida
                      D.C. Docket No. 0:21-cv-62362-RS
USCA11 Case: 23-13059      Document: 16-1     Date Filed: 11/29/2023     Page: 2 of 2

       2                      Opinion of the Court                 23-13059

                            ____________________

       Before WILSON, GRANT, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic-
       tion. David Saulsberry appeals from the district court’s August 15,
       2023 paperless order striking his motion for summary judgment.
       The court previously vacated a jury verdict and final judgment in
       favor of Saulsberry and has set a new trial for December 4, 2023.
              We lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the August 15
       order is not final or otherwise appealable. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; CSX
       Transp., Inc. v. City of Garden City, 235 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir.
       2000). The order is not final because Saulsberry’s claims, and the
       defendant’s counterclaims, have not yet been resolved. See Supreme
       Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant, 689 F.3d 1244, 1245-46 (11th Cir.
       2012). Furthermore, the order is not otherwise appealable under
       the collateral order doctrine because it would not be effectively un-
       reviewable on appeal from a final judgment. See Plaintiff A v. Schair,
       744 F.3d 1247, 1252-53 (11th Cir. 2014).
              No petition for rehearing may be ﬁled unless it complies
       with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all
       other applicable rules.