Ronald Satish Emrit v. United States Patent and Trademark Office

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 25-11546

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

RONALD SATISH EMRIT, a.k.a. Presidential Candidate Number P60005535, Plaintiff-Appellant,

PRESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE/SEPARATE SEGREGATED FUND (SSF) NUMBER C00569897, d.b.a. United Emrits of America, Plaintiff,

versus UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, (USPTO), UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, NASA GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER, (GSFC) in Greenbelt, Maryland,

2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-11546

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS, (AIP), KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, in Cape Canaveral, Florida, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:25-cv-00082-JRH-BKE

____________________

Before ROSENBAUM, NEWSOM, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction . Ronald Emrit, proceeding pro se, appeals from the magistrate judge’s April 16, 2025, report and recommendation that his complaint be dismissed.

A magistrate judge’s recommendation on a dispositive matter that has not been adopted or otherwise rendered final by the district court at the time the notice of appeal is filed is not final and appealable. See Perez-Priego v. Alachua Cnty. Clerk of Ct., 148 F.3d 1272, 1273 (11th Cir. 1998); 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Moreover, the district court’s subsequent adoption of the recommendation and entry of

3

25-11546 Opinion of the Court 3

final judgment did not cure Emrit’s premature notice of appeal. See Perez-Priego, 148 F.3d at 1273.

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.