Court Opinion

ID: 9896225
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-09 20:01:02.266414+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:14:31.567657
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-13133    Document: 13-1     Date Filed: 11/09/2023   Page: 1 of 2

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]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

                          ____________________

                                No. 23-13133
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
       versus
       JEFFREY SPIVACK,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Florida
                   D.C. Docket No. 9:21-cr-80016-KAM-1
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 23-13133      Document: 13-1     Date Filed: 11/09/2023     Page: 2 of 2

       2                      Opinion of the Court                 23-13133

       Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR, and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
               This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic-
       tion. Jeﬀrey Spivack appeals from the district court’s September 7,
       2023, order construing his motion to dismiss as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255
       motion to vacate sentence. That order is not ﬁnal and appealable,
       however, because it did not end the litigation on the merits in the
       district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Acheron Cap., Ltd. v. Mukamal,
       22 F.4th 979, 986 (11th Cir. 2022) (stating that a ﬁnal order ends the
       litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but
       execute its judgment). The district court has not ruled on the re-
       characterized § 2255 motion or entered a judgment in the § 2255
       proceedings.
               Additionally, the district court’s September 7, 2023, order is
       not eﬀectively unreviewable on appeal from a ﬁnal order resolving
       the case on the merits. Plaintiﬀ A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1252-53
       (11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that a ruling that does not conclude the
       litigation may be appealed under the collateral order doctrine if it,
       inter alia, is “eﬀectively unreviewable on appeal from a ﬁnal judg-
       ment”).
               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.