Filed: Jun. 04, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2425 RODNEY MICHAEL BAILEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MID ATLANTIC ISOTOPES/GEODAX, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA- 01-3795-JFM) Submitted: April 22, 2003 Decided: June 4, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney Michael Bailey, Appella
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2425 RODNEY MICHAEL BAILEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MID ATLANTIC ISOTOPES/GEODAX, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA- 01-3795-JFM) Submitted: April 22, 2003 Decided: June 4, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney Michael Bailey, Appellan..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-2425
RODNEY MICHAEL BAILEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MID ATLANTIC ISOTOPES/GEODAX,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA-
01-3795-JFM)
Submitted: April 22, 2003 Decided: June 4, 2003
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rodney Michael Bailey, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick Milton
Pilachowski, Stephen David Shawe, SHAWE & ROSENTHAL, L.L.P.,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Rodney M. Bailey seeks to appeal the order of the clerk of the
district court awarding costs to Mid Atlantic Isotopes/Geodax
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1), and Local Rule 105.6 (D.
Md.), following judgment for the latter party. Pursuant to Rule
54(d)(1), the clerk may tax costs to the prevailing party. “On
motion served within 5 days thereafter, the action of the clerk may
be reviewed by the court.” This court has held that failure to make
a timely motion under the rule constitutes a waiver of the right to
such review. Gary v. Spires,
634 F.2d 772, 773 (4th Cir. 1980);
see also Cooper v. Eagle River Mem’l Hosp., Inc.,
270 F.3d 456, 464
(7th Cir. 2001); Walker v. California,
200 F.3d 624, 626 (9th Cir.
1999). Here, Bailey’s failure to seek review of the Order in
district court constitutes waiver of his right to contest the
award, and deprives this court of jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1291
(2000); 29 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000). Accordingly, we 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