Court Opinion

ID: 9400439
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-08 15:01:02.91525+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:44.838212
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-11575   Document: 5-1      Date Filed: 06/08/2023   Page: 1 of 4

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]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

                         ____________________

                               No. 23-11575
                         Non-Argument Calendar
                         ____________________

      RONALD SATISH EMRIT,
                                                     Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
      versus
      SABINE AISHA JULES,

                                                   Defendant-Appellee.

                         ____________________

                Appeal from the United States District Court
                   for the Northern District of Alabama
                    D.C. Docket No. 2:23-cv-00453-JHE
                         ____________________
USCA11 Case: 23-11575     Document: 5-1      Date Filed: 06/08/2023     Page: 2 of 4

      2                      Opinion of the Court                 23-11575

      Before ROSENBAUM, LUCK, and BRASHER. Circuit Judges.
      PER CURIAM:
              This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic-
      tion.
             Ronald Emrit filed a notice of appeal in the above-listed civil
      action. While he did not designate a specific order for appeal, the
      only orders entered in the case were a magistrate judge’s order
      granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis but directing the filing
      of an amended complaint, and his later order to show cause why
      the case should not be dismissed because Emrit failed to timely file
      an amended complaint. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c) (providing that a
      notice of appeal must, among other things, “designate the judg-
      ment, order, or part thereof being appealed”). But see Becker v.
      Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 767 (2001) (“Imperfections in noticing an
      appeal should not be fatal where no genuine doubt exists about
      who is appealing, from what judgment, to which appellate court.”).
              Magistrate judge orders issued under the supervision of a
      district court “are not final orders and may not be appealed until
      rendered final by a district court.” Donovan v. Sarasota Concrete Co.,
      693 F.2d 1061, 1066-67 (11th Cir. 1982). This Court has jurisdiction
      over an appeal from a final judgment entered by a magistrate judge
      only if the parties consented to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction
      over the case. McNab v. J & J Marine, Inc., 240 F.3d 1326, 1327-28
      (11th Cir. 2001); see 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(3).
USCA11 Case: 23-11575      Document: 5-1      Date Filed: 06/08/2023      Page: 3 of 4

      23-11575                Opinion of the Court                          3

              While there is no indication here that the parties consented
      to magistrate judge jurisdiction over the case, we lack jurisdiction
      even if they did, because the orders the magistrate judge issued do
      not constitute a final decision that may be immediately appealed.
      The order directing the filing of an amended complaint identified
      defects in Emrit’s original complaint, but did not make any defini-
      tive determination regarding the existence of jurisdiction, the pro-
      priety of venue, or whether the complaint stated a viable claim.
      Instead, it simply found that the complaint needed to be recast be-
      fore those determinations could be made, contemplating further
      proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Acheron Cap., Ltd. v. Mukamal, 22
      F.4th 979, 986 (11th Cir. 2022) (“A final decision is typically one that
      ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to
      do but execute its judgment.” (quotation marks omitted)); Freyre v.
      Chronister, 910 F.3d 1371, 1377 (11th Cir. 2018) (explaining that a
      district court order which “contemplates further substantive pro-
      ceedings in a case is not final and appealable”).
              Even after Emrit did not amend his complaint by the magis-
      trate judge’s deadline and filed a notice of appeal, there was no final
      dismissal order because the magistrate judge had not yet held ei-
      ther that no amendment was possible or that the dismissal of the
      complaint constituted a dismissal of the action. See Auto. Alignment
      & Body Serv., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 953 F.3d 707, 719-
      22 (11th Cir. 2020); Garfield v. NDC Health Cor., 466 F.3d 1255,
      1260-61 (11th Cir. 2006) (explaining that when a complaint is invol-
      untarily dismissed without prejudice with leave to amend, and the
      plaintiff elects to pursue an appeal before the time to amend expires
USCA11 Case: 23-11575     Document: 5-1      Date Filed: 06/08/2023     Page: 4 of 4

      4                      Opinion of the Court                 23-11575

      rather than amend the complaint, the plaintiff waives his right to
      amend, thereby rendering the dismissal order final and appealable);
      Czeremcha v. Int’l Ass’n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO,
      724 F.2d 1552, 1554-55 & n.4 (11th Cir. 1984) (explaining that the
      dismissal of a complaint, not of the action, is not a final order, un-
      less the court holds either that no amendment is possible or that
      the dismissal of the complaint also constitutes a dismissal of the ac-
      tion). Indeed, the magistrate judge’s order to show cause, entered
      after the time to amend expired, shows that the action had not yet
      been dismissed, and itself contemplated further proceedings before
      dismissal would take place. Freyre, 910 F.3d at 1377.
             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.