U.S. National Association v. Robert Walker

── U.S. National Association v. Robert Walker ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: May 19, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-12010 Document: 27-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2026 Page: 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-12010 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ U.S. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellee, versus ROBERT WALKER, Defendant-Cross Claimant-Counter Claimant-Appellant, MERCEDES F. KELLY, Defendant-Cross Defendant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 2:25-cv-14089-SMM ____________________ Before ROSENBAUM, JILL PRYOR, and KIDD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 25-12010 Document: 27-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2026 Page: 2 of 3 2 Opinion of the Court 25-12010 Robert Walker, pro se, appeals from various rulings related to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction and the district court clerk’s refusal to enter a default against U.S. Bank National Association (“U.S. Bank”). U.S. Bank moves to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that Walker is attempting to appeal from in- terlocutory orders that have not been certified for immediate ap- pellate review under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Walker responds that the rulings are final and appealable and asserts that U.S. Bank did not notify him of the motion to dismiss. We lack jurisdiction over Walker’s appeal. The challenged rulings are not final because they did not end the litigation on the merits, as the operative complaint and Walker’s counterclaims and crossclaims remain pending before the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; CSX Transp., Inc. v. City of Garden City, 235 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir. 2000) (providing that a final judgment ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment). Additionally, none of the rulings are appealable under the collateral order doctrine because there is no indication that they would be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final order resolving the case on the merits. See Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1252-53 (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). Moreo- ver, the district court did not certify any of the rulings for immedi- ate appellate review. See 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). USCA11 Case: 25-12010 Document: 27-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2026 Page: 3 of 3 25-12010 Opinion of the Court 3 Accordingly, U.S. Bank’s motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction is GRANTED, and this appeal is DISMISSED. U.S. Bank’s motion for an expedited ruling is GRANTED to the extent that it requests dismissal of the appeal but is otherwise de- nied as moot. All other pending motions are DENIED as moot.