Samuel Smith, Jr. v. Miami-Dade County

USCA11 Case: 26-12012 Document: 13-1 Date Filed: 07/14/2026 Page: 1 of 2

NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 26-12012 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

SAMUEL LEE SMITH, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, a municipality, WALMART, INC., a Foreign for-Profit Corporation,

Defendants-Appellees.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 1:26-cv-20464-DSL ____________________

Before NEWSOM, BRANCH, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

USCA11 Case: 26-12012 Document: 13-1 Date Filed: 07/14/2026 Page: 2 of 2 2 Opinion of the Court 26-12012

Samuel Smith, pro se, appeals from the district court’s May 27, 2026 order directing him to respond to the defendants’ motions to dismiss his amended complaint.

We lack jurisdiction over Smith’s appeal because it is not taken from a final or otherwise appealable order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (providing that appellate jurisdiction is generally limited to “final decisions of the district courts”); id. § 1292 (providing that appellate jurisdiction includes specific interlocutory orders made appealable by statute or jurisprudential exception). First, the May 27 order is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because it did not end the litigation on the merits, as Smith’s complaint remains pend- ing in the district court. See CSX Transp., Inc. v. City of Garden City, 235 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir. 2000) (explaining that final orders generally end litigation on the merits). Additionally, it is not ap- pealable under the collateral order doctrine because it is not effec- tively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment. See Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1253 (11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that a ruling that does not conclude the litigation may be appealed under the collateral order doctrine if, among other things, it would effec- tively be unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment).

Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.