Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Anderson v. Donald, No. 09-1279 (Fed. Cir. May 6, 2009)

Dismissed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 09-1279
Decided
May 6, 2009
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-1279

MICHAEL S. ANDERSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

James Donald, COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

and Victor Walker, WARDEN, AUGUSTA STATE MEDICAL PRISON,

Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia in case

no. 1:06-CV-115, Judge Dudley H. Bowen.

Before GAJARSA, FRIEDMAN, and LINN, Circuit Judges.

Figure on page 1 of the opinion

ORDER

Upon review of Michael S. Anderson's recently docketed appeal, we sua sponte consider whether we have jurisdiction over this appeal.

Anderson filed a prisoner civil rights complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Anderson appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal on January 8, 2008. On March 3, 2008, the United States Supreme Court denied Anderson's petition for writ of certiorari. In March of 2009, Anderson filed another notice of appeal with the district court, this time seeking review by this court.

It is unclear whether Anderson seeks review of the district court's decision, the2 Eleventh Circuit's decision, or the Supreme Court's disposition. In any event, this court does not have jurisdiction to review any of those matters. This court's jurisdiction over appeals is limited pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1295 (a)(1), (2). Therefore, this appeal must be dismissed.

Figure on page 2 of the opinion
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
Anderson's appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Each side shall bear its own costs.

(3)(cid:9) Any other pending motions are moot.

FOR THE COURT

MAY - 6 2009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Date Jan Horbaly

Clerk FOR THE COURT

rOitfilMs

cc:(cid:9) Michael S. Anderson WIter

FEDERAL CIRCUIT s20

MAY 6 2009

rthitsktu CLERK

2009-1279(cid:9) 2

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Anderson v. Donald, No. 09-1279 (Fed. Cir. May 6, 2009).

Record ID
CAFC-09-1279-20090506
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-09-1279-20090506

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.