Court Opinion

ID: 9930162
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-06 15:00:57.825959+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:06:39.541304
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 24-10090   Document: 5-1     Date Filed: 02/06/2024   Page: 1 of 3

                                                 [DO NOT PUBLISH]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

                         ____________________

                              No. 24-10090
                         Non-Argument Calendar
                         ____________________

      JOE HAND PROMOTIONS, INC.,
                                                     Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
      versus
      DIANE WILLIAMS,
      Individually, as oﬃcers, directors,
      shareholders, members and/or principals
      of Tastemakers Elite LLC d/b/a Cabana Sands,
      RALPH A. WILLIAMS,
      Individually, as oﬃcers, directors,
      shareholders, members and/or principals
      of Tastemakers Elite LLC d/b/a Cabana Sands,
      TASTEMAKERS ELITE LLC,
USCA11 Case: 24-10090      Document: 5-1     Date Filed: 02/06/2024     Page: 2 of 3

      2                       Opinion of the Court                24-10090

      d.b.a. Cabana Sands,

                                                   Defendants-Appellants.

                            ____________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Middle District of Florida
                   D.C. Docket No. 8:23-cv-02311-VMC-NHA
                            ____________________

      Before WILSON, NEWSOM, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
               Ralph Williams and Diane Williams (collectively, the “Wil-
       liamses”), appeal from the district court’s December 7, 2023 order
       that denied their objection and motion to dismiss plaintiff Joe Hand
       Promotions, Inc.’s (“Joe Hand Promotions”) complaint. That or-
       der 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).
              Joe Hand Promotions’s claims against the Williamses re-
       main pending before the district court, and the district court did
       not certify its order for immediate review under Federal Rule of
       Civil Procedure 54(b). See Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant,
USCA11 Case: 24-10090     Document: 5-1      Date Filed: 02/06/2024     Page: 3 of 3

      24-10090               Opinion of the Court                         3

      689 F.3d 1244, 1246 (11th Cir. 2012) (noting that an order that dis-
      poses of fewer than all claims against all parties to an action is not
      immediately appealable absent certification pursuant to Rule
      54(b)). Nor is the district court’s December 7, 2023 order effec-
      tively unreviewable on appeal from a final order resolving the case
      on the merits. See Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1252-53 (11th
      Cir. 2014) (explaining that a ruling that does not conclude the liti-
      gation may be appealed under the collateral order doctrine if it, in-
      ter alia, is “effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judg-
      ment”).
             Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack
      of jurisdiction. 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.