LITTLEJOHN v. OCWEN FINANCIAL CORPORATION, 12-2313. (2013)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20130315072
Visitors: 6
Filed: Mar. 15, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 15, 2013
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Albert Littlejohn seeks to appeal the district court's order granting defendants' motion to dismiss his complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). 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
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Albert Littlejohn seeks to appeal the district court's order granting defendants' motion to dismiss his complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). 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 ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Albert Littlejohn seeks to appeal the district court's order granting defendants' motion to dismiss his complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). 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 September 11, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on October 19, 2012. Because Littlejohn failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal and deny his motion for judicial notice. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.
Source: Leagle
