Filed: Jun. 18, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1238 COURTNEY L. BROCKINGTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MR. KIM STENSON, Director; EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (3:16-cv-04026-MBS) Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 18, 2018 Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1238 COURTNEY L. BROCKINGTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MR. KIM STENSON, Director; EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (3:16-cv-04026-MBS) Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 18, 2018 Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1238
COURTNEY L. BROCKINGTON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MR. KIM STENSON, Director; EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (3:16-cv-04026-MBS)
Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 18, 2018
Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Courtney L. Brockington, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Courtney L. Brockington seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the
magistrate judge’s reports and recommendations and dismissing her complaint. 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 January 29, 2018. The
notice of appeal was filed on March 2, 2018. Because Brockington 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 this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2