Corry Pearson, proceeding pro se, filed a lawsuit alleging eight claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act against five defendants, including three consumer reporting agencies, a collection company, and CitiBank. Pearson claimed these defendants inaccurately reported a tradeline associated with his account. On March 3, 2026, the district court granted a joint motion to dismiss by the first four defendants, terminating Counts I-VI and VIII from the case. However, the court left Count VII against CitiBank pending. Pearson immediately appealed the March 3 order, but the Eleventh Circuit determined that the order was not a final judgment because it did not dispose of all claims against all parties.
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's order was not final under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 1292. The opinion explains that an order disposing of fewer than all claims or parties is not immediately appealable unless the district court certifies the order for immediate review pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). The court noted that the March 3 order did not resolve all claims or parties and failed to qualify for immediate appellate review under the collateral order doctrine or interlocutory appeal statutes. Specifically, the order did not resolve an issue completely separate from the merits, and the issue is effectively reviewable upon appeal from a final judgment.
Pearson must wait for the district court to issue a final judgment on the remaining claim against CitiBank before he can appeal. The dismissal means the appellate court will not review the partial dismissal of the other defendants until the entire case is resolved or the district court issues a Rule 54(b) certification.