DENNIS JACOBS
SUMMARY ORDER
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT'S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION "SUMMARY ORDER"). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of New York, on the 21st day of December, two thousand eleven.
PRESENT:
DENNIS JACOBS,
Chief Judge,
PIERRE N. LEVAL,
DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON,
Circuit Judges.
FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT: Felix I. Lessambo, pro se, Mount Vernon, NY.
FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES: Stephen L. Sheinfeld, William M. Sunkel, Winston & Strawn LLP, New York, NY.
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED,
AND DECREED that the District Court judgment is AFFIRMED.
Plaintiff-Appellant Felix I. Lessambo, pro se, appeals from the September 29, 2010 judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Pauley, J.) dismissing the complaint on summary judgment. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts and the procedural history of the case. [1] This Court lacks jurisdiction to review the District Court's June 2009 decision granting the motion for partial judgment on the pleadings because that decision was not designated in Lessambo's notice of appeal, as required by Rule 3(c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure. See Shrader v. CSX Transp., Inc., 70 F.3d 255, 256 (2d Cir. 1995) (holding that, when a notice of appeal specified one district court order while failing to reference another, an appeal from the unmentioned order cannot be considered). Therefore, insofar as Lessambo challenges the District Court's June 2009 decision, the appeal is dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. [2] As to Lessambo's remaining contentions, we affirm for substantially the same reasons stated in the District Court's thorough opinion.
Finding no merit in Lessambo's remaining arguments, we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court, and DISMISS the portion of the appeal for which we lack jurisdiction.
FOR THE COURT:
Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk