Full Opinion

USCA11 Case: 25-12783 Document: 40-1 Date Filed: 11/12/2026 Page: 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-12783 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PRISCILLA ANN ELLIS, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:15-cr-00320-SDM-NHA-3 ____________________ Before GRANT, LAGOA, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Priscilla Ann Ellis, pro se, filed a notice of appeal that desig- nates three docket entries, none of which are court orders. She filed a pro se brief challenging the district court’s July 9, 2025, order USCA11 Case: 25-12783 Document: 40-1 Date Filed: 11/12/2026 Page: 2 of 3 2 Opinion of the Court 25-12783 denying seven of her postjudgment motions, and appearing to also challenge both her underlying sentence and an April 28, 2023, order regarding a motion to vacate her convictions. Counsel then en- tered an appearance and filed a brief on Ellis’s behalf—that brief challenges only the July 9, 2025, order. Ellis responded by moving to discharge counsel, strike his brief, and reinstate her pro se brief. To the extent that this appeal is not duplicative of other ap- peals, we lack jurisdiction over it. First, Ellis has already appealed the July 9, 2025, order. Thus, to any extent this appeal is taken from that order, it is duplicative of Appeal No. 25-12594. See United States v. Arlt, 567 F.2d 1295, 1297 (5th Cir. 1978) (explaining that an appel- lant “is not entitled to two appeals” from the same judgment); I.A. Durbin, Inc. v. Jefferson Nat’l Bank, 793 F.2d 1541, 1551-52 (11th Cir. 1986) (explaining that federal courts may use their inherent admin- istrative power to dismiss duplicative litigation and avoid wasting judicial resources). Second, to any extent that Ellis challenges her underlying convictions or sentence, this appeal is duplicative of Ap- peal No. 17-14716. See Arlt, 567 F.2d at 1297; I.A. Durbin, 793 F.2d at 1551-52. Third, to any extent that Ellis challenges the April 28, 2023, order, her appeal is untimely, depriving us of jurisdiction. See Ferrara v. United States, 547 F.2d 861, 862 (5th Cir. 1977) (explaining that motions to vacate are civil in nature); 28 U.S.C. § 2107(b) (providing that, in civil appeals in which there is a federal party, a notice of appeal must be filed within 60 days of the challenged or- der or judgment); Green v. Drug Enf’t Admin., 606 F.3d 1296, 1300- 01 (11th Cir. 2010) (explaining that, in civil cases, a timely notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement). USCA11 Case: 25-12783 Document: 40-1 Date Filed: 11/12/2026 Page: 3 of 3 25-12783 Opinion of the Court 3 Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, as dupli- cative and for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.