Edward Brown v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

USCA11 Case: 25-12812 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 04/03/2026 Page: 1 of 2

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-12812 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ EDWARD LEE BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, versus ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-00041-AW-ZCB ____________________ Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR, and KIDD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 25-12812 Document: 20-1 Date Filed: 04/03/2026 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 25-12812 This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction.

Edward Lee Brown, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) that the petition be denied. Brown filed a notice of appeal designating the R&R. The district court then adopted the R&R and entered judgment.

The R&R was not final when Brown filed his notice of appeal because it did not end the litigation on the merits. See CSX Transp., Inc. v. City of Garden City, 235 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir. 2000) (explaining that a final judgment leaves nothing for the district court to do but execute the judgment); Perez-Priego v. Alachua Cnty. Clerk of Ct., 148 F.3d 1272, 1273 (11th Cir. 1998) (holding that a magistrate judge’s recommendation that has not been adopted by the district court is not final and immediately appealable). The district court’s subsequent adoption of the R&R did not cure this defect. See Perez-Priego, 148 F.3d at 1273 (holding that a district court’s subsequent adoption of a recommendation cannot cure a premature appeal).

All pending motions are DENIED as moot.