USCA11 Case: 25-12733 Document: 4-1 Date Filed: 09/19/2025 Page: 1 of 2

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-12733 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

STAR BORROWER SFR5 LP, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus

SAMMY HUGGINS, et al., Defendants, STEVEN HUGGINS, and all others, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:25-cv-04266-SDG ____________________

Before BRANCH, LUCK, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 25-12733 Document: 4-1 Date Filed: 09/19/2025 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-12733

Steven Huggins, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal purporting to appeal an order recommending remand of his peti- tion for removal. The district court’s docket, however, does not reflect such an order, and Huggins cannot appeal a nonexistent or expected order. See Bogle v. Orange Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 162 F.3d 653, 661 (11th Cir. 1998) (holding that a notice of appeal must designate an already existing judgment or order, not one that is merely expected to be entered sometime in the future or that is, or should be, within the appellant’s contemplation when the notice of appeal is filed). Further, the district court has not entered any final, appealable order, as Huggins’s petition remains pending. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (providing that appellate jurisdiction is generally lim- ited to “final decisions of the district courts”); Acheron Cap., Ltd. v. Mukamal, 22 F.4th 979, 986 (11th Cir. 2022) (“A final decision is typ- ically one that ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute its judgment.”). Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction.