Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

McCASKEY v. HENRY, 12-1931. (2012)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: infco20121001071 Visitors: 7
Filed: Oct. 01, 2012
Latest Update: Oct. 01, 2012
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: DeShane A. McCaskey seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her discrimination claim. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)
More

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

DeShane A. McCaskey seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her discrimination claim. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 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). "[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement." Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court's order was entered on the docket on April 3, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on July 24, 2012. Because McCaskey failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, 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.

Source:  Leagle

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