Filed: Jul. 22, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 19 2002 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge Clerk No. 02-50114 Summary Calendar LI YU, Administrator of the Estate of Wei Y. Wu, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus STATE OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; CAROLINE A. HERRERA, Materials and Test Section, Construction Division, Texas Department of Transportation; KATHERINE L. HOLTZ, Materials and Test Section, Construction Division, Texas Department
Summary: F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 19 2002 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge Clerk No. 02-50114 Summary Calendar LI YU, Administrator of the Estate of Wei Y. Wu, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus STATE OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; CAROLINE A. HERRERA, Materials and Test Section, Construction Division, Texas Department of Transportation; KATHERINE L. HOLTZ, Materials and Test Section, Construction Division, Texas Department ..
More
F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 19 2002
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge
Clerk
No. 02-50114
Summary Calendar
LI YU, Administrator of the Estate of Wei Y. Wu,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
STATE OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; CAROLINE A. HERRERA,
Materials and Test Section, Construction Division, Texas Department
of Transportation; KATHERINE L. HOLTZ, Materials and Test Section,
Construction Division, Texas Department of Transportation,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. A-01-CV-741-SS
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Li Yu, as administrator of the estate of Wei Y. Wu, appeals
the district court’s order dismissing her claims against defendants
Texas Department of Transportation and Caroline A. Herrera and
Katherine L. Holtz in their official capacities. The order,
however, did not dismiss Yu’s claims against Herrera and Holtz in
*
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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
their individual capacities under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 and
state tort law. In the absence of a Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 54(b) certification, which Yu did not request and the
district court did not provide, we have no jurisdiction over the
appeal of an order dismissing all claims against one defendant but
only dismissing some but not all of the plaintiff’s claims against
the other defendants.1
APPEAL DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
1
See Gibbs v. Grimmette,
254 F.3d 545, 550 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied,
122 S. Ct. 1083 (2002); Woods v. Smith,
60 F.3d 1161, 1167 (5th Cir. 1995);
Arango v. Guzman Travel Advisors Corp.,
621 F.2d 1371, 1378 n.8 (5th Cir. 1980).
2