IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20122
Summary Calendar
ERIC CANTRELL HOLMES,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
HARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,
TOMMY B. THOMAS; J.G. SHANNON, Sergeant;
T.W. BELL, Deputy; R.G. STANLEY, Deputy;
HARRIS COUNTY JAIL, Dietician; DY ORLANDO,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-96-CV-4504
--------------------
June 16, 2000
Before GARWOOD, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eric Cantrell Holmes, Texas prisoner # 786465, appeals the
district court’s order granting the motion for summary judgment
filed by defendants Thomas, Bell, and Stanley. Defendant Shannon
did not join in this motion. The other parties were not served.
When an action involves multiple parties or multiple claims,
any decision that adjudicates the liability of fewer than all the
parties or disposes of fewer than all the claims does not
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 99-20122
-2-
terminate the litigation and is not appealable unless certified
under FED. R. CIV. P. 54(b). See Thompson v. Betts, 754 F.2d
1243, 1245 (5th Cir. 1985). The district court’s judgment is not
final as to all parties.
This court lacks jurisdiction to review the order because
the order was not certified for appeal under Rule 54(b) and
nothing in the record indicates the district court’s unmistakable
intent to enter a partial final judgment under Rule 54(b). See
Briargrove Shopping Ctr. Joint Venture v. Pilgrim Enters., Inc.,
170 F.3d 536, 538-41 (5th Cir. 1999); Kelly v. Lee’s Old
Fashioned Hamburgers, Inc., 908 F.2d 1218, 1220 (5th Cir.
1990)(en banc). Further, the order cannot be appealed under the
collateral order doctrine because it is reviewable on appeal
after the final judgment disposing of all claims in the suit.
See Thompson v. Betts, 754 F.2d 1243, 1246 (5th Cir. 1985).
Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
APPEAL DISMISSED.