Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Joseph E. Davis v. Central Classification and Records Unit, 91-7047 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-7047 Visitors: 9
Filed: May 23, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 933 F.2d 1001 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Joseph E. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CENTRAL CLASSIFICATION AND RECORDS UNIT, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-7047. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted May 6, 1991. Decided May 23, 199
More

933 F.2d 1001
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Joseph E. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CENTRAL CLASSIFICATION AND RECORDS UNIT, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-7047.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 6, 1991.
Decided May 23, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-90-816-AM)

Joseph E. Davis, appellant pro se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Joseph E. Davis noted this appeal outside the 30-day appeal period established by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), and failed to move for an extension of the appeal period within the additional 30-day period provided by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5). The time periods established by Fed.R.App.P. 4 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)). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore 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.

2

DISMISSED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer