Deandre Arnold v. City of Hampton, et al

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 23-11389
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
DEANDRE ARNOLD,
on behalf of Tymya Arnold,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CITY OF HAMPTON,
WAYNE JERNIGAN,
sued in his official and individual capacity,
OTANYA CLARKE
STACY COLEY,
DERRICK AUSTIN,
sued in their official and individual capacities, et al.,
USCA11 Case: 23-11389 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 06/26/2023 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2 Opinion of the Court 23-11389
Defendants-Appellees,
KIM STEPHENS,
sued in her official and individual capacity, et al.,
Defendants.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
D.C. Docket No. 1:21-cv-04970-SEG
____________________
Before WILSON, L UCK , and L AGOA , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic-
tion. Deandre Arnold appeals from the district court’s March 16,
2023 order granting motions to dismiss filed by the City of Hamp-
ton, Wayne Jernigan, Otanya Clarke, and Mellissa Brooks, and
denying as moot Arnold’s motions for partial summary judgment
and leave to file an amended statement of material facts. 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)
USCA11 Case: 23-11389 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 06/26/2023 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

23-11389 Opinion of the Court 3
(stating that a final order ends the litigation on the merits and leaves
nothing for the court to do but execute its judgment).
Arnold’s claims against Stacy Coley; Derrick Austin; Denise
Henderson; Brian Amero; Sabriya Hill; Lynn Chambers; Suzette
Gray; Katy Snyder; Henry County, Georgia; Danna Yu; and
Melinda O’Neill remain 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, 689 F.3d 1244, 1246 (11th Cir. 2012) (noting that an
order that disposes of fewer than all claims against all parties to an
action is not immediately appealable absent certification pursuant
to Rule 54(b)). Additionally, the district court’s March 16, 2023 or-
der is not effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final order re-
solving 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 con-
clude the litigation may be appealed under the collateral order doc-
trine if it, inter alia, is “effectively unreviewable on appeal from a
final judgment”).
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.
USCA11 Case: 23-11389 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 06/26/2023 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --