USCA11 Case: 23-14213 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 02/20/2024 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 23-14213 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

SIRTAJ MATHAUDA, Petitioner-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent-Appellee.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 1:18-cv-22057-JAL ____________________ USCA11 Case: 23-14213 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 02/20/2024 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 23-14213

Before BRANCH, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. Sirtaj Mathauda, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s October 21, 2020, final order and judgment in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceedings. Mathauda timely appealed that judgment in Novem- ber 2020 and, in appeal number 20-14623, we denied a certificate of appealability. Mathauda’s appeal is duplicative and untimely. We may use our inherent administrative power to dismiss duplicative litigation to avoid wasting judicial resources. Colo. River Water Conservation Dist. v. United States, 424 U.S. 800, 817-18 (1976); accord I.A. Durbin, Inc. v. Jefferson Nat’l Bank, 793 F.2d 1541, 1551 (11th Cir. 1986). An- other appeal of the § 2255 judgment would be duplicative. See United States v. Arlt, 567 F.2d 1295, 1297 (5th Cir. 1978) (noting that an appellant is not generally entitled to two appeals from the same judgment). Further, the statutory time limit required Mathauda to file a notice of appeal on or before December 21, 2020, the first Monday following 60 days after the district court entered its judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(b); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 26(a)(1)(C). How- ever, he did not file the instant notice of appeal until December 28, 2023, and thus, it cannot invoke our jurisdiction. See Green v. Drug Enf’t Admin., 606 F.3d 1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 2010). USCA11 Case: 23-14213 Document: 14-1 Date Filed: 02/20/2024 Page: 3 of 3

23-14213 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.