Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

26 F. App'x 338

Doe v. Shalala

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided February 7, 2002

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2002-02-07

Cited by 3 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2012

1 federal appellate ·

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · See v. City of Seattle

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2002-02-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 OPINION

PER CURIAM.

¶2 Mary Doe, a human embryo “born” in the United States (and subsequently frozen in which state of eryopreservation her life is presently suspended), individually and on behalf of all other frozen human embryos similarly situated, and the National Association for the Advancement of Preborn Children (collectively “Appellants”) appeal the district court’s order administratively closing their civil lawsuit challenging the Clinton Administration’s policies regarding federal funding of human stem cell research. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable.

¶3 This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 387 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appeal-able interlocutory or collateral order. It merely removes the case from the district court’s active docket until the issue of federal funding for stem cell research is settled by the Bush Administration.

¶4 We therefore dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

¶5 DISMISSED.

/26/fappx/338 · .json · Public domain