Microtech Knives, Inc. v. Jon Janecek

── Microtech Knives, Inc. v. Jon Janecek ── Case No.: 26-10096 Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: March 11, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 26-10096 Document: 18-1 Date Filed: 03/11/2026 Page: 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 26-10096 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ MICROTECH KNIVES, INC., Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellant, versus OUTDOORS ONLINE, LLC, Defendant-Cross Claimant-Appellee, JON JANECEK, Defendant-Counter Claimant - Cross Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-04381-VMC ____________________ Before JORDAN, BRASHER, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 26-10096 Document: 18-1 Date Filed: 03/11/2026 Page: 2 of 3 2 Opinion of the Court 26-10096 This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiff Microtech Knives, Inc. (“Microtech”) appeals from the district court’s summary judgment entered in favor of Outdoors Online, LLC (“Outdoors”), one of two defendants in this action. The other defendant, Jon Janecek, asserted counterclaims against Microtech. The appealed judgment is not final because Microtech’s claims against Janecek and Janecek’s counterclaims remain unresolved. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; CSX Transp., Inc. v. City of Garden City, 235 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir. 2000) (explaining that a final judgment ends the litigation on the merits and 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). Microtech and Janecek’s stipulation of voluntary dismissal as to the claims between them was ineffective to terminate those claims because the stipulation was not signed by Outdoors, who appeared in the action before the stipulation was filed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); City of Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Hosp. Holdings, L.P., 82 F.4th 1031, 1038 (11th Cir. 2023) (holding that a stipulation of voluntary dismissal requires a signature from all parties who have appeared, including dismissed parties, to be effective). Because Microtech’s claims against Janecek and Janecek’s counterclaims remain pending, the judgment did not end the USCA11 Case: 26-10096 Document: 18-1 Date Filed: 03/11/2026 Page: 3 of 3 26-10096 Opinion of the Court 3 litigation on the merits, and we lack jurisdiction to review it. See Sargeant, 689 F.3d at 1246.