Court Opinion

ID: 9892905
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-25 15:01:04.520751+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:50:01.902141
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-1865    Document: 4     Page: 1   Filed: 10/25/2023

          NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                 ______________________

         CHEYENNE MITCHELL FRAZIER,
               Plaintiff-Appellant

                            v.

                      MARLIN, TX,
                       Defendant

 NATHAN SODEK, by and through his heirs at law,
        Vicki Sodek and Randy Sodek,
               Defendant-Appellee
            ______________________

                       2023-1865
                 ______________________

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas in No. 6:19-cv-00645-JCM, Mag-
istrate Judge Jeffrey C. Manske.
                  ______________________

  Before DYK, CUNNINGHAM, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
                       ORDER
   Having received no response to the court’s July 12,
2023, order to show cause, we now transfer.
    Cheyenne Mitchell Frazier filed this suit in the United
States District Court for the Western District of Texas
Case: 23-1865      Document: 4    Page: 2    Filed: 10/25/2023

2                                       FRAZIER v. MARLIN, TX

against former Chief of Police Nathan Sodek, his heirs, and
the city of Marlin, Texas, asserting violation of her civil
rights, Fourth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitu-
tion, and rights under the Texas Constitution. The district
court dismissed Ms. Frazier’s case for failure to prosecute.
She then filed an appeal seeking review in this court.
    This appeal does not fall within the limited authority
that Congress granted this court to review decisions of fed-
eral district courts. That jurisdiction extends to cases aris-
ing under the patent laws, see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1); civil
actions on review to the district court from the United
States Patent and Trademark Office, see §1295(a)(4)(C); or
certain damages claims against the United States “not ex-
ceeding $10,000 in amount,” 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), see 28
U.S.C. § 1295(a)(2); 28 U.S.C. § 1292(c)(1). Lacking juris-
diction, we may transfer to another court where “the action
or appeal could have been brought at the time it was filed.”
28 U.S.C. § 1631. Here, the appropriate court is the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
    Accordingly,
    IT IS ORDERED THAT:
    This appeal and all transmittals are transferred to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit pursu-
ant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
                                       FOR THE COURT
 October 25, 2023
      Date                             /s/ Jarrett B. Perlow
                                       Jarrett B. Perlow
                                       Clerk of Court