Automated Summary
Key Facts
On February 20, 2025, the district court imposed filing restrictions on Waseem Daker due to his history of vexatious litigation. Daker appealed the clerk's refusal to file his response to that order in two habeas corpus actions. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals determined Daker lacks standing because the clerk did file his response in the underlying miscellaneous action, and the refusal to docket it in other cases did not prevent the district court from evaluating his response or otherwise harm Daker. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
The court addressed whether it has jurisdiction over Daker's appeal from the clerk's refusal to file his response to a February 20 order in two habeas actions. The court determined that Daker lacks standing to challenge this action because the clerk's refusal did not aggrieve him, as the response was filed in the underlying miscellaneous action and the district court expressly addressed it in the June 4 sanctions order.
Holdings
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed this appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the petitioner, Waseem Daker, lacks standing to challenge the clerk's refusal to file his response to the February 20, 2025 order in two habeas corpus actions. The court found that the clerk's refusal did not aggrieve Daker because the response was filed in the underlying miscellaneous action and the district court addressed it in a June 4 sanctions order. All pending motions were denied as moot.
Remedies
The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the petitioner lacked standing to challenge the clerk's refusal to file a response in two habeas actions. All pending motions were denied as moot.
Legal Principles
An appellate court lacks jurisdiction over an appeal when the appellant lacks standing because they were not aggrieved by the challenged action. A litigant must be aggrieved by the order or judgment at issue to have standing to appeal. The court found that Daker was not aggrieved by the clerk's refusal to file his response in two habeas actions because the response was already filed in the underlying miscellaneous action that underlies the appeal, and the district court could still evaluate it.
Precedent Name
- Wolff v. Cash 4 Titles
- Kimberly Regenesis, LLC v. Lee County
Cited Statute
28 United States Code
Judge Name
- Luck
- Jill Pryor
- Branch
Passage Text
- Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.
- Upon review of the record and Daker's response to the JQs, we conclude that Daker lacks standing to challenge the action that is the sole basis of this appeal—the clerk's refusal to file his response to the February 20 order in two of his habeas actions—because that refusal did not aggrieve him.
- See Wolff v. Cash 4 Titles, 351 F.3d 1348, 1353-54 (11th Cir. 2003) (explaining that we lack jurisdiction over appeals brought by appellants without appellate standing); Kimberly Regenesis, LLC v. Lee County, 64 F.4th 1253, 1259 (11th Cir. 2023) (explaining that only litigants who are aggrieved by the order or judgment at issue can appeal).