Farris v. International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental Reinforcing Steel Local 11 ( 2020 )

USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC#: ss SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED; __ 12/3/2020 ee ee ee ee ee eee ee ee eee eee eee eee eee x MOSHA FARRIS, ET AL. : Plaintiffs, : : 1:20-CV-01314 (ALC) -against- : : ORDER INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGE, : STRUCTURAL, ORNAMENTAL REINFORCING: STEEL LOCAL 11, : Defendant. : ANDREW L. CARTER, JR., District Judge: On November 24, 2020, the Court issued an order directing Plaintiff CEC Steel Limited Liability Company (hereinafter, “CEC Steel”) to appear through counsel by January 8, 2021 and advising that failure to do so would result in CEC Steel being dismissed from the case. ECF No. 18. Plaintiff subsequently sent a letter to the Court requesting leave to file an appeal of that order.' ECF No. 20. The Court hereby DENIES Plaintiff leave to file an appeal. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 1292, the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to hear appeals from: (1) final decisions and (2) interlocutory orders of the district courts of the United States. A final decision “ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” Jn re Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, New York, Inc., 745 F.3d 30, 36 (2d Cir. 2014) (per curiam) (quoting Coopers & Lybrand y. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463, 467 (1978), superseded by statute, FED. R. CIv. P. 23(f), as recognized in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, --- US. ---, 137 S.Ct. 1702 (2017)) (internal quotation marks omitted). To be appealable as an interlocutory order pursuant to the collateral order doctrine, the order must (1) “conclusively Plaintiff’s letter is dated November 11, 2020; however, the Court received this letter on November 27, 2020. The letter was docketed on December 1, 2020. ECF No. 20. determine the disputed question;” (2) resolve an important issue completely separate from the merits of the action;” and (3) “be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.” Jd. at 36. 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) provides that [w]hen a district judge, in making in a civil action an order not otherwise appealable under this section, shall be of the opinion that such order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation, he shall so state in writing in such order. This Court’s order directing Plaintiff CEC Steel to appear through counsel within 45 days or be dismissed does not constitute an appealable order pursuant to the above doctrines. To the extent Plaintiff seeks certification under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), Plaintiffs certification request is DENIED. Defendant is hereby ORDERED to serve Plaintiff with a copy of this order and file proof of service by December 8, 2020. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 3, 2020 (Cae New York, New York 7 )—. ANDREW L. CARTER, JR. United States District Judge