Michael Haspel v. Centurion of Florida, LLC

── Michael Haspel v. Centurion of Florida, LLC ── Case No.: 26-10327 Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: March 24, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 26-10327 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 26-10327 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ MICHAEL HASPEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CENTURION OF FLORIDA, LLC, PAMELA JANSEN, Nurse Practitioner, NIKI HESSER, RN, MORGAN FISHER, LPN, K. MACHUCA, RN, et al., Defendants-Appellees, JANE DOE, Nurse, USCA11 Case: 26-10327 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 2 of 3 2 Opinion of the Court 26-10327 Defendant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 5:23-cv-00083-MCR-MJF ____________________ Before LAGOA, ABUDU, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. Michael Haspel, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals from the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The district court’s order is not final because Haspel’s claims against three of the defendants remain pending. 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); Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant, 689 F.3d 1244, 1246 (11th Cir. 2012) (explaining that an order disposing of fewer than all claims is not final). The district court did not certify the order for immediate appeal, and it is not otherwise immediately appealable. See Sargeant, 689 F.3d at 1246 (explaining that an order disposing of fewer than all claims may only be appealable if the district court certifies the order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b)); Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1252-53 (11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that an order must USCA11 Case: 26-10327 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 3 of 3 26-10327 Opinion of the Court 3 resolve a collateral issue completely separate from the merits and be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment to be appealable under the collateral order doctrine).