Raymond Sims-Lewis v. James Willett ( 2017 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-6436
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6437
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor; DR. P. OBER, Medical Doctor,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6438
RAYMOND EUGENE SIMS-LEWIS, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6439
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6440
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS, JR,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor,
Defendants - Appellees.
2
No. 17-6441
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6442
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor; DR. P. OBER, Doctor Operation of PRJ; RACHEL
RICE, Pamunkey Regional Jail Medical Director of Staff; LAVERN SMITH,
Pamunkey Regional Jail Medical Staff Supervisor,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6443
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
3
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Superintendent; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL, Owner;
DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6444
RAYMOND E. SIMS-LEWIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT; PAMUNKEY REGIONAL JAIL; DWIGHT C. JONES,
Mayor; VIRGINIA GOVERNOR; VIRGINIA LAW JUDGE STEVEN
GOLDSTEIN,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 17-6445
RAYMOND EUGENE SIMS-LEWIS, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Pamunkey Regional Jail Superintendent; PAMUNKEY
REGIONAL JAIL, Owners; DWIGHT C. JONES, Virginia Mayor,
Defendants - Appellees.
4
No. 17-6446
RAYMOND EUGENE SIMS-LEWIS, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES C. WILLETT, Pamunkey Regional Jail Superintendent; PAMUNKEY
REGIONAL JAIL, Owners; DWIGHT C. JONES, Mayor of Virginia,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:15-cv-00383-MSD-LRL; 2:15-cv-00390-
MSD-RJK; 2:15-cv-00413-MSD-LRL; 2:15-cv-00424-MSD-RJK; 2:15-cv-00425-MSD-
DEM; 2:15-cv-00426-MSD-LRL; 2:15-cv-00436-MSD-LRL; 2:15-cv-00440-MSD-RJK;
2:15-cv-00449-MSD-RJK; 2:15-cv-00454-MSD-RJK; 2:15-cv-00463-MSD-LRL)
Submitted: June 22, 2017 Decided: June 27, 2017
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Raymond E. Sims-Lewis, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
5
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Raymond Eugene Sims-Lewis seeks to appeal the
district court’s orders dismissing his complaints alleging claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012). We dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of
appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded 30 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 entered its orders dismissing Sims-Lewis’ complaints between
September 29, 2015 and December 4, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on March 22,
2017. * Because Sims-Lewis failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an
extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis
and dismiss the appeals. 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
*
For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for
mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).
6