11th Cir.

Cadejuste v. Miliken

July 13, 2026 ·4:26-cv-00027-MW-MAF ·Per Curiam · By Maria Santos

The Eleventh Circuit dismissed an appeal filed by a pro se prisoner challenging a district court order directing him to amend his complaint. The court held it lacked jurisdiction because the underlying order was not final and the notice of appeal was filed before the judgment was entered.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 0:48

Background

Marco Cadejuste, a Florida state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a motion seeking injunctive relief. A magistrate judge directed him to file a complaint instead. Cadejuste filed a complaint alleging violations of his First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. On March tenth, two thousand and twenty-six, the magistrate judge denied the motion and directed Cadejuste to submit an amended complaint or voluntarily dismiss the case. Cadejuste filed a writ of certiorari that the district court construed as a notice of appeal. The district court adopted a report and recommendation dismissing the amended complaint without prejudice.

The court’s reasoning

The court determined it lacked jurisdiction because the March tenth order was not a final decision or appealable under the collateral order doctrine. The order did not dispose of any claims and contemplated further proceedings. Additionally, the portions of the order denying injunctive relief had merged into the final judgment. The court further found the notice of appeal ineffective because it was filed prior to the district court entering its judgment.

What it means going forward

The appeal is dismissed, leaving the district court’s dismissal of the amended complaint without prejudice in place. The prisoner must file a new appeal from the final judgment if he wishes to challenge the dismissal or the denial of injunctive relief.