Albert Anderson v. Doe 1 ( 2023 )

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6266 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-6266
ALBERT MARQUAVIOUS LAMAR ANDERSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JANE DOE 1; SERGEANT LEWIS; OFFICER DOLO,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:21-ct-03289-FL)
Submitted: November 21, 2023 Decided: December 19, 2023
Before GREGORY and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert Anderson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6266 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Albert Marquavious Lamar Anderson seeks to appeal the district court’s order and
judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute
and failure to comply with a court order, and the court’s subsequent order denying
Anderson’s motion to alter or amend the judgment. We dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
In civil cases, parties have 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). Where, as here,
a party files a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment within 28 days of the
judgment’s entry, the 30-day appeal period is tolled until disposition of that motion. Fed.
R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(iv).
The district court entered its order denying Anderson’s motion to alter or amend the
judgment on January 19, 2023. Anderson filed the notice of appeal on March 15, 2023. 1
Because Anderson failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or
1
For purposes of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
appeal is the earliest date Anderson could have delivered the notice of appeal to prison
officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266,
276 (1988).
2
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6266 Doc: 16 Filed: 12/19/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Anderson’s motions for
general relief.
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
3