Whether a pro se litigant's appeal of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation can be considered jurisdictionally valid when the underlying order is not a final decision or within an established appealable category

No question identified. : wholeheartedly believe that my phone was targeted and stolen for the records, files, and exhibits regarding this ongoing retaliation. I further believe these USBs, CDs, are targeted and stolen because of the financial information concerning my mom’s and dad’s financial matters. My USB was targeted, and stolen five days prior to phone. My USB was stolen on March 25, 2024, at a public library. I was gone no longer than 5-minutes from the computer. No one had logged on after me. Someone took my USB from the back of the computer. I did report this matter. OCR dismissed this complaint last week. Honorable Alito Jr., when I text my stolen iPhone of 5+ years, almost a year later, from the time it was stolen (03.30.2024), and presently, I receive the texts from my stolen IPhone [(469) 671-8941]. If 1 were in the court of law regarding my stolen phone, the phone records could be presented, in the court of law Gustice), to show that I am in possession of the stolen phone. If I am texting my stolen phone, and I am receiving the texts on a new phone (different number), what would the jury believe? The IPhone that was stolen remains on to assist in the investigation into who, how, and why my [Phone of 5+ years was targeted and stolen. Honorable Judge Alito Jr., attached below, as full support for this application for extension of time, I reiterate Doc. 27 (03.11.2025) Case: 24-11020, as if fully rewritten herein EXHIBIT 1: Appellant’s Emergency Motion for Extension to File Brief 24-11020Appellant Further Motion for Stay of All Appeals Pending Exhaustion of Remedies for Appointment of Counsel Per FRAP 82) and Any/All Applicable Fed. R. Civ. P., FRAP, 5 Circ Rules, IOP, 28 U.S.C. 1916, and State, and Federal Statues. Appellant Motion for Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law by Honorable Chief Justice Jennifer Walker Elrod and the Chief Justices’ Panel of Associate Justices (21 pgs.). Case: 24-11 103 Document: 32-2 Page: 6 Dajeyiled: 02/28/2025 Gnited States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 24-11102 February 17, 2025 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk DELORIS PHILLIPS, versus TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE DIVISION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, Defendant —Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:24-CV-2694 UNPUBLISHED ORDER Before SOUTHWICK, WILLETT, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion if necessary. Hill v. City of Seven Points, 230 F.3d 167, 169 (5th Cir. 2000). Plaintiff, a sanctioned litigant, filed a pro se notice of appeal from the December 9, 2024 magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to deny leave to remove and close the case. Case: 24-11 102-5, Document: 32-2 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/28/2025 No. 24-11102 “Federal appellate courts have jurisdiction over appeals only from (1) a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291; (2) a decision that is deemed final due to jurisprudential exception or that has been properly certified as final pursuant to FED. R. Civ. P. 54(b); and (3) interlocutory orders that fall into specific classes, 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a), or that have been properly certified for appeal by the district court, 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).” Askanase v. Livingwell, Inc., 981 F.2d 807, 809-10 (5th Cir. 1993). The report and recommendation of a magistrate judge is not a final order, and it does not fall into any of the other categories that would make it appealable. See United States v. Cooper, 135 F.3d 960, 961 (5th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. All pending motions are DENIED. No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Wiow lou — PETITIONER (Your Name) VS. \OT— RESPONDENT(S) ROOF OF SERVICE )S , do swear or declare that on this date, : , as required by Supreme Court Rule 29 I have served the enclosed MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS and MA G2.01 Low Okay mM '—\ vy CL : on