Filed: Jan. 13, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: Filed: January 13, 1998 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-1894 (CA-97-224-5-BR-2) Monika Gonzalez, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus James Askins, etc., et al, Defendants - Appellees. O R D E R The Court amends its opinion filed November 7, 1997, as follows: On the cover sheet, section 6 - The status line is corrected to read "Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion." For the Court - By Direction /s/ Patricia S. Connor Clerk UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Summary: Filed: January 13, 1998 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-1894 (CA-97-224-5-BR-2) Monika Gonzalez, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus James Askins, etc., et al, Defendants - Appellees. O R D E R The Court amends its opinion filed November 7, 1997, as follows: On the cover sheet, section 6 - The status line is corrected to read "Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion." For the Court - By Direction /s/ Patricia S. Connor Clerk UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS ..
More
Filed: January 13, 1998
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1894
(CA-97-224-5-BR-2)
Monika Gonzalez,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
James Askins, etc., et al,
Defendants - Appellees.
O R D E R
The Court amends its opinion filed November 7, 1997, as
follows:
On the cover sheet, section 6 -- The status line is corrected
to read "Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion."
For the Court - By Direction
/s/ Patricia S. Connor
Clerk
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1894
MONIKA GONZALEZ,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JAMES ASKINS, Dr.; STANLEY K. GILBERT, Dr.;
WILLIAM S. BRITT,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District
Judge. (CA-97-224-5-BR-2)
Submitted: October 20, 1997 Decided: November 7, 1997
Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Monika Gonzalez, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
2
PER CURIAM:
Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal
are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and
jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections,
434
U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson,
361 U.S.
220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have thirty days within
which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judg-
ments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions
to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time
to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal
period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).
The district court entered its order and judgment on April 23,
1997; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on July 8, 1997, which
is beyond the thirty-day appeal period. Appellant's failure to note
a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves
this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appel-
lant's appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3