Court Opinion

ID: 40842
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 20:55:10+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:51.561113
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                                                    F I L E D
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                                                    March 1, 2006
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                         _____________________                 Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                       Clerk
                              No. 04-21027
                         _____________________

PAUL REX; TOM CONKLIN,
                                                Plaintiffs - Appellees,

                                 versus

RONNIE CHUMLEY, ET AL.,

                                                               Defendants,

RONNIE CHUMLEY; PATSY WILLIAMS,

                                               Defendants - Appellants.

__________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
            for the Southern District of Texas, Houston
                       USDC No. 4:04-CV-3195
_________________________________________________________________

Before JOLLY, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     The   initial   question   in   this   appeal   is   whether   we   have

jurisdiction over the District Court’s denial of the Defendants’

motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.     We have appellate jurisdiction only if that ruling

denied the Defendants’ claim for qualified immunity on some legal

ground.    See Hatfield v. Scott, 306 F.3d 223, 225 (5th Cir. 2002).

On the basis of the pleadings and record before us, we are unable

*
 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under
the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
to make that determination.   We therefore dismiss the appeal and

remand the case to the District Court for further proceedings.

                                                APPEAL DISMISSED.

                                2