Darius Morris v. Dooly SP Warden

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 25-12106

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

DARIUS MORRIS, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus DOOLY SP WARDEN,

Respondent-Appellee.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-05532-LMM

____________________

2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-12106

Before BRANCH, GRANT, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction because it is not taken from a final or immediately appealable order .

Darius Morris, pro se, appears to seek review of the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation (“R&R”) that his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition be dismissed and the associated order for service of the R&R upon the parties, both of which were entered on June 3, 2025. The magistrate judge’s R&R is not final or appealable because the district court had not adopted it or rendered it final when Morris appealed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (providing that appellate jurisdiction is generally limited to “final decisions of the district courts”); Perez-Priego v. Alachua Cnty. Clerk of Ct., 148 F.3d 1272, 1273 (11th Cir. 1998) (explaining that a magistrate judge’s R&R that has not been adopted by the district court is not final or immediately appealable). Moreover, the district court’s later adoption of the R&R did not cure Morris’s premature appeal. See Perez-Priego, 148 F.3d at 1273. Finally, the magistrate judge’s order for service of the R&R is not a final or otherwise immediately appealable order . See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; CSX Transp., Inc. v. City of Garden City, 235 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir. 2000) (explaining that final orders generally end litigation on the merits).

All pending motions are DENIED as moot.