Brian Davis v. Betty Marak , 558 F. App'x 417 ( 2014 )

Case: 13-30968 Document: 00512559270 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/12/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 13-30968 March 12, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
BRIAN DAVIS, Clerk
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
BETTY MARAK; JOE BLACK; UNKNOWN FEDERAL AGENTS,
Defendants-Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 5:13-CV-2182
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Brian Davis appeals the district court’s order that dismissed his claims
against his court appointed counsel, Assistant Federal Public Defender Betty
Marak, and stayed his claims concerning the allegedly unlawful use of a
confidential informant to gather evidence in his criminal prosecution. He
moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) following the district court’s
certification that the appeal was not taken in good faith.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Case: 13-30968 Document: 00512559270 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/12/2014
No. 13-30968
“This Court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion,
if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). Our
jurisdiction is limited to appeals from “final decisions of the district courts.” 28
U.S.C. § 1291. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), a decision that
adjudicates fewer than all the claims may be considered on appeal if the
district court expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay and
expressly directs entry of judgment. A district court satisfies the requirements
for entering an order of final judgment under Rule 54(b) “[i]f the language in
the order appealed from, either independently or together with related portions
of the record referred to in the order, reflects the district court’s unmistakable
intent to enter a partial final judgment under Rule 54(b) . . . .” Kelly v. Lee’s
Old Fashioned Hamburgers, Inc., 908 F.2d 1218, 1220 (5th Cir. 1990) (en banc).
The district court’s order does not indicate that the district court
intended for it to be a partial final judgment under Rule 54(b). See id.Accordingly, this court is without jurisdiction, and the appeal is dismissed.
Davis’s IFP motion is denied.
APPEAL DISMISSED; IFP MOTION DENIED.
2