Cameron Thierry v. Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC
This text of Cameron Thierry v. Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC (Cameron Thierry v. Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
USCA11 Case: 26-10546 Document: 10-1 Date Filed: 04/17/2026 Page: 1 of 2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 26-10546 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________
CAMERON THIERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus
SERTA SIMMONS BEDDING, LLC, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-00279-MHC-JEM ____________________
Before BRANCH, ABUDU, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. Cameron Thierry appeals from the district court’s January 20, 2026 order dismissing Counts I, II, III, and VI of his second USCA11 Case: 26-10546 Document: 10-1 Date Filed: 04/17/2026 Page: 2 of 2
2 Opinion of the Court 26-10546
amended complaint. However, because Counts IV and V were not dismissed, the court’s order was not a final or appealable decision, and we lack jurisdiction to review the order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant, 689 F.3d 1244, 1245-46 (11th Cir. 2012) (explaining that an order that disposes of fewer than all the claims of all parties to an action is not final or immediately ap- pealable unless the district court certifies the order for immediate review pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b)); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) (providing for entry of judgment as to fewer than all claims or par- ties); Freyre v. Chronister, 910 F.3d 1371, 1377 (11th Cir. 2018) (ex- plaining that a district court order which “contemplates further substantive proceedings in a case is not final and appealable”). Moreover, the district court did not certify its order under Rule 54(b) or 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). All pending motions are DENIED as moot.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Cameron Thierry v. Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cameron-thierry-v-serta-simmons-bedding-llc-ca11-2026.