Joshua Wren v. Jimmy Curtis, et al

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-11710 Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction] Judge: EGJ , Judge: PRO , Judge: CH [16-11710]

Case: 16-11710

Document: 00514140044

Page: 1

Date Filed: 09/01/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

No. 16-11710
Summary Calendar

FILED
September 1, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

JOSHUA WREN,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.

OFFICER JIMMY CURTIS; OFFICER NFN MENDEZ; OFFICER NFN
PRADO; OFFICER NFN VANDAM; SERGEANT NFN ALCANTAR;
SERGEANT NFN MILLER; SERGEANT NFN LOZANO; LIEUTENANT NFN
CANTRELL; MEDICAL PERSONNEL JONES; JOHN DOE; BRIAN
COLLIER, TDCJ, Executive Director,
Defendants-Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:16-CV-196
Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Joshua Wren, Texas prisoner # 01982778, appeals the magistrate judge's
denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. 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). Although an order denying the appointment

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
*

Case: 16-11710

Document: 00514140044

Page: 2

Date Filed: 09/01/2017

No. 16-11710
of counsel in a civil rights action is immediately appealable, Robbins v. Maggio,
750 F.2d 405, 413 (5th Cir. 1985), if that order was issued by a magistrate
judge and the parties have not consented to proceed before a magistrate judge,
the order must first be appealed to the district court. 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(A),(c)(1),(c)(3); see Alpine View Co. v. Atlas Copco AB, 205 F.3d 208,
219-20 (5th Cir.2000). Otherwise, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the
magistrate judge’s order. United States v. Renfro, 620 F.2d 497, 500 (5th Cir.
1980).
The record does not indicate that the parties consented to proceed before
a magistrate judge or that the district court ruled on Wren’s objections and
issued its own order on the motion for appointment of counsel. Therefore, we
dismiss Wren’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
APPEAL DISMISSED.

2