Raissa Djuissi Kengne v. Georgia Power Company

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• Decided: September 4, 2024
• Docket: 22-12828
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 22-12828 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-12828 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

RAISSA DJUISSI KENGNE, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GEORGIA POWER COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:22-cv-02297-SEG ____________________ USCA11 Case: 22-12828 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 22-12828

Before WILSON, BRANCH, and GRANT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. Raissa Kengne appeals from the magistrate judge’s June 10, 2022, report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that her complaint be dismissed and denying her application to proceed in forma pauperis. Because the R&R had not been adopted by the district court at the time of the filing of the notice of appeal, it was not final and appealable. See United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1359 (11th Cir. 2009) (noting that we lack jurisdiction to hear ap- peals directly from magistrate judges); McNab v. J & J Marine, Inc., 240 F.3d 1326, 1327-28 (11th Cir. 2001) (explaining that, absent con- sent to adjudication by a magistrate judge, decisions by a magis- trate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) are not final orders and may not be appealed until rendered final by a district court). Fur- thermore, the district judge’s subsequent partial adoption of the R&R did not cure the premature notice of appeal. See Perez-Priego v. Alachua Cnty. Clerk of Ct., 148 F.3d 1272, 1273 (11th Cir. 1998) (noting that the court’s subsequent adoption of a magistrate judge’s R&R does not cure the premature notice of appeal); Bogle v. Orange Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 162 F.3d 653, 661 (11th Cir. 1998) (explaining that a notice of appeal must designate an already existing judgment or order, not one that is merely expected to be entered). USCA11 Case: 22-12828 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 09/04/2024 Page: 3 of 3

22-12828 Opinion of the Court 3

All pending motions are DENIED as moot. 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.