Appellate Case: 24-3150 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 05/08/2025 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT May 8, 2025 _______________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court MICHELLE RENEE LAMB, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 24-3150 v. (D.C. No. 5:23-CV-03239-JWL) (D. Kan.) LAURA KELLY; DAVID McCABE; MEGAN DAVIS; DALTON HARTPENCE; JOHN and/or JANE DOES 1-10, Defendants - Appellees. _______________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _______________________________________ Before BACHARACH, MORITZ, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges. _______________________________________ This appeal is brought by Ms. Michelle Renee Lamb, who is a transgender prisoner. We dismiss the appeal because it’s untimely.

* Oral argument would not help us decide the appeal, so we have decided the appeal based on the record and the appellant’s brief. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(C); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).

Our order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. But the order and judgment may be cited for its persuasive value if otherwise appropriate. See Fed. R. App. P. 32.1(a); 10th Cir. R. 32.1(A).

Appellate Case: 24-3150 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 05/08/2025 Page: 2

The district court entered judgment against Ms. Lamb and denied reconsideration. Ms. Lamb had 30 days to appeal from the denial of reconsideration (August 6, 2024). Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Instead of appealing, she continued filing documents in district court. Addressing these filings, the court explained that the case had been closed with the denial of reconsideration.

Ms. Lamb eventually filed a notice of appeal. But this filing was nearly a month late. 1 As a result, the notice of appeal didn’t create jurisdiction and we must dismiss the appeal. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 206–07 (2007).

While the appeal was pending, however, Ms. Lamb filed two documents: (1) Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order and (2) Motion for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order. (She has also filed other documents supporting the first of these motions.) Motions for restraining orders and preliminary injunctions must be filed in district court, not the court of appeals. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)–(b). But Ms. Lamb is pro se, so we liberally construe these motions.

See Lankford v. Wagner, 835 F.3d 1119, 1121 (10th Cir. 2017). Because she’s seeking interim injunctions, we treat her motions as requests for a

The deadline was September 5, 2024, and she filed the notice of appeal on October 2, 2024.

Appellate Case: 24-3150 Document: 17-1 Date Filed: 05/08/2025 Page: 3

stay of the district court’s ruling while our appeal is pending. Fed. R. App. P. 8(a)(2).

But as noted above, we have now dismissed the appeal. So Ms. Lamb’s requests for a stay (what she calls a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order) are moot. See, e.g., FTC v. Zurixx, 26 F.4th 1172, 1178 (10th Cir. 2022) (concluding that a request for a stay pending appeal is moot when the appeal itself is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction).

Because these requests are moot, they’re dismissed.

Entered for the Court

Robert E. Bacharach Circuit Judge