5th Cir.

Luna v. Granadas

June 30, 2026 ·25-40744 ·Per Curiam · By Aisha Johnson

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit dismissed an appeal filed by a Texas prisoner challenging the denial of a motion to reopen his civil rights case. The court found it lacked jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was untimely and failed to properly designate the ruling being challenged.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:04

Background

Larry Dean Luna, a Texas prisoner, filed a Section nineteen eighty-three action alleging deliberate indifference to his medical needs. The district court dismissed the action with prejudice. Luna appealed, but that appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. More than a year later, Luna moved to reopen his proceedings, and the district court denied the motion. Luna then filed a notice of appeal from that denial.

The court’s reasoning

The court examined its jurisdiction on its own motion. It found that the notice of appeal challenging the dismissal of the Section nineteen eighty-three action was untimely. Furthermore, the notice of appeal filed within thirty days of the denial of the motion to reopen failed to designate that denial as the ruling from which the appeal was taken. Consequently, there was no effective notice of appeal from the denial of the motion to reopen.

This Court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion, if necessary.

Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987)

What it means going forward

The dismissal for lack of jurisdiction prevents any review of the district court’s denial of the motion to reopen the Section nineteen eighty-three proceedings.