Robert Johnson v. Jay Vannoy ( 2015 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7712
ROBERT W. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAY VANNOY; DAVID B. FREEDMAN; TOM E. HORNE; LEIGH C.
BRICKER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (5:14-cv-00055-FDW)
Submitted: February 25, 2015 Decided: March 2, 2015
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert W. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert W. Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing as frivolous his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). 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 29, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on
November 13, 2014. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276
(1988). Because Johnson failed to file a timely notice of
appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal
period, we dismiss the appeal. We also deny Johnson’s motion
for appointment of counsel. 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