Pamela Ebron v. Nancy Berryhill ( 2018 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-2448
PAMELA V. EBRON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Newport News. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (4:17-cv-00040-MSD-LRL)
Submitted: April 19, 2018 Decided: April 23, 2018
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Pamela V. Ebron, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Patrick Shean, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Pamela V. Ebron seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without
prejudice her complaint requesting review of the Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration’s decision. * We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction
because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal
must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or
order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 October 20, 2017. The
notice of appeal was filed on December 22, 2017. Because Ebron 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
*
The district court’s order is final and appealable because the defect identified by
the district court must be cured by something more than an amendment to the allegations
in the complaint. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-24 (4th
Cir. 2015).
2