Data Technology Group, Inc. v. Capital Data Analytics, Inc.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: March 19, 2026
• Docket: 25-13427
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 25-13427 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 03/19/2026 Page: 1 of 2

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-13427 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

DATA TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, versus

RANELLA CONSULTING, INC., et al., Defendants, CAPITAL DATA ANALYTICS, INC., KYLE FRYE, Individually, Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-02657-TRJ ____________________

Before JILL PRYOR, GRANT, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. USCA11 Case: 25-13427 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 03/19/2026 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-13427

PER CURIAM: Data Technology Group, Inc. filed an amended complaint against four defendants. On September 18, 2025, the district court entered an order granting the motion to dismiss filed by two of those defendants. Data Technology Group appeals that order. We lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the September 18 order is not final, as Data Technology Group’s amended com- plaint against the remaining defendants remains pending before the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (providing appellate juris- diction over “final decisions of the district courts”); Acheron Cap., Ltd. v. Mukamal, 22 F.4th 979, 986 (11th Cir. 2022) (explaining that a final decision ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute its judgment). Further, that order is not otherwise appealable now because the district court did not certify it for immediate review and it is effectively reviewable on appeal from a final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) (providing for appeal of certain certified interlocutory orders); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) (providing for entry of final judgment as to fewer than all par- ties or claims); Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1252–53 (11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that a ruling that does not conclude the litigation may be appealed under the collateral order doctrine if it, inter alia, is “effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment” (ci- tation modified)). Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction.