The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied leave to appeal because the certification order from the District Court did not demonstrate that the governing standards for an interlocutory appeal were met. In Linton vs. Shell Oil Co., 563 F3d 556 (5th Cir. 2009) the district court denied Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and in its Certification Order framed the controlling questions of law that the Judge believed was presented by the Order being certified. However, the court simply used the statutory language of Section 1292(b) and said that the issues involved controlling questions of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.
The Appellate Court pointed out that the Defendant should have sought certification not only of the bare questions of law, but also of the district court’s Order giving its reasoning as to how these questions were resolved and why that resolution led to the denial of the Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court said
“Further, we strongly suggest to District Judges the advisability of stating more than an abstract description of the legal questions involved or a bare finding that the statutory requirements of Section 1292(b) have been met.” (p.588)