Derrick Mike Allen v. Jeff Jackson

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
DERRICK MIKE ALLEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
JEFF JACKSON, in his official capacity as North
Carolina Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, TYLER BROOKS,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, ROY COOPER, in
his official capacity as former Governor of North
Carolina, JOSH STEIN, in his official capacity as
Governor of North Carolina, WAKE COUNTY
DETENTION CENTER, WAKE COUNTY PUBLIC
SAFETY CENTER,
Defendants
______________________
2025-1679
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia in No. 1:25-cv-00842-UNA, Judge
Christopher R. Cooper.
______________________
PER CURIAM.
O R D E R
In response to the court’s May 23, 2025 order to show
cause, Derrick Mike Allen requests transfer to the United
Case: 25-1679 Document: 4 Page: 1 Filed: 08/12/2025

-- 1 of 3 --

ALLEN v. JACKSON 2
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Cir-
cuit.
Mr. Allen filed a complaint against state and local offi-
cials and entities in the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia and moved for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis (“IFP”). On March 27, 2025, the district
court ordered Mr. Allen to provide a certified copy of his
prison trust account statement or to inform the court that
he was no longer in custody. Mr. Allen then filed a notice
of appeal directed to this court from “the decision of [the]
United States District Judge,” ECF No. 1-2 at 1. His mo-
tion for IFP before the district court remains pending.
As Mr. Allen recognizes in his response, this appeal
does not fall within the limited authority that Congress
granted this court to review decisions of federal district
courts. See 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a). While Mr. Allen requests
transfer to the United States Court of Appeals for the Dis-
trict of Columbia Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1631, such
transfer would not be appropriate because Mr. Allen is
seeking review of an order that is clearly interlocutory and
not appealable to any court. Cf. Roberts v. U.S. Dist. Ct.
for N. Dist. of Cal., 339 U.S. 844, 845 (1950) (holding that
denial of an IFP motion is an appealable order).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
Case: 25-1679 Document: 4 Page: 2 Filed: 08/12/2025

-- 2 of 3 --

ALLEN v. JACKSON 3
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
August 12, 2025
Date
FOR THE COURT
Case: 25-1679 Document: 4 Page: 3 Filed: 08/12/2025

-- 3 of 3 --