Robert Andris v. Capital Solutions Bancorp, LLC

── Robert Andris v. Capital Solutions Bancorp, LLC ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: April 27, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 26-10484 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 04/27/2026 Page: 1 of 2 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 26-10484 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ ROBERT J. ANDRIS, AVONDALE DECOR, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus CAPITAL SOLUTIONS BANCORP, LLC, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 2:25-cv-00450-JES-NPM ____________________ Before JORDAN, BRASHER, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic- tion. Robert Andris and Avondale Décor, LLC, appeal from the USCA11 Case: 26-10484 Document: 15-1 Date Filed: 04/27/2026 Page: 2 of 2 2 Opinion of the Court 26-10484 district court’s January 21, 2026 order dismissing Counts I, III, V, VI, and VIII of their second amended complaint. However, be- cause Counts II, IV, and VII were not dismissed, the court’s order was not a final or appealable decision, and we lack jurisdiction to review the order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant, 689 F.3d 1244, 1245-46 (11th Cir. 2012) (explaining that an order that disposes of fewer than all the claims of all parties to an action is not final or immediately appealable unless the district court certifies the order for immediate review pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b)); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) (providing for entry of judgment as to fewer than all claims or parties). Moreover, the district court instructed the clerk to withhold judgment until conclusion of the case and did not certify its order under Rule 54(b) or 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b); Freyre v. Chro- nister, 910 F.3d 1371, 1377 (11th Cir. 2018) (explaining that a district court order which “contemplates further substantive proceedings in a case is not final and appealable”).