Filed: May 11, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1300 JEROME JULIUS BROWN, SR., Plaintiff – Appellant, v. RONALD R.J. HENDLER, Chief Executive Officer; JOHN D. ASHCROFT, Department of Justice; MARGARET ANN NOLAN, Assistant Attorney General, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge. (1:01-cv-02107-BEL) Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 11, 2009 Before NIEM
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1300 JEROME JULIUS BROWN, SR., Plaintiff – Appellant, v. RONALD R.J. HENDLER, Chief Executive Officer; JOHN D. ASHCROFT, Department of Justice; MARGARET ANN NOLAN, Assistant Attorney General, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge. (1:01-cv-02107-BEL) Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 11, 2009 Before NIEME..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-1300
JEROME JULIUS BROWN, SR.,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
RONALD R.J. HENDLER, Chief Executive Officer; JOHN D.
ASHCROFT, Department of Justice; MARGARET ANN NOLAN,
Assistant Attorney General,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District
Judge. (1:01-cv-02107-BEL)
Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: May 11, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jerome Julius Brown, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jerome Julius Brown, Sr., seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action and
denying his motion for copy work at government expense. We
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice
of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a
party, parties in a civil case are required to file the notice
of appeal no more than sixty days after the judgment or order
appealed from is entered, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the
district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P.
4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P.
4(a)(6). This appeal period is mandatory and jurisdictional.
Bowles v. Russell,
551 U.S. 205 (2007).
The district court’s orders were entered on
July 20, 2001, and November 16, 2004. The notice of appeal was
filed on February 18, 2009. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(d). Because
Brown failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an
extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to
proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2