United States v. Donald Branham, 690 F.3d 633

Defendant-appellant Branham and Intervenor-appellant Charlotte Branham appeal district court denial of motions to dissolve a writ of garnishment and to hold a hearing.
Guilty Branham was sentenced to 30 months and ordered to pay $1.8 million in restitution; government sought garnishment under 28 U.S.C. § 3205 against Wells Fargo accounts.
Wells Fargo answered possessing about $8,581 in accounts belonging to Branham, Charlotte, or both.
Branhams moved to quash service on Wells Fargo and to dissolve the writ, arguing Charlotte’s accounts are not community property; they also requested a hearing.
District court denied the motions without a hearing or further explanation.
Court lacks appellate jurisdiction because no final judgment disposing of the garnished property has been entered under § 3205(c)(7); appeal dismissed without prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the appeal is premature for lack of a final order under § 1291	Branham asserts appeal from a final disposition of the writ and related claims.	Government contends there is no final disposition and thus no appellate jurisdiction.	Not final; no appellate jurisdiction.

United States v. Stone, 291 F. App’x 684 (5th Cir. 2008) (appeal from partial garnishment rulings not final; not appealable)
Thompson v. Betts, 754 F.2d 1243 (5th Cir. 1985) (final order requirement for § 1291 appeals)
United States v. Ekong, 518 F.3d 285 (5th Cir. 2007) (district court final order of garnishment authority)
United States v. Goyette, 446 F. App’x 718 (5th Cir. 2011) (district court final order of garnishment)
United States v. Petal, 444 F. App’x 737 (5th Cir. 2011) (finality concept in garnishment context)