Manetirony Clervrain v. Lawrence Hogan

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-7490
MANETIRONY CLERVRAIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LAWRENCE J. HOGAN; JOHN CASPER WOBENSMITH; BRIAN E. FROSH;
JOHN SONDWED,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
George Jarrod Hazel, District Judge. (8:19-cv-00805-GJH)
Submitted: February 18, 2021 Decided: February 23, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Manetirony Clervrain, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Manetirony Clervrain seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), his complaint, which the district court construed as a 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 complaint. 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).
The district court entered its order on March 20, 2019. Clervrain filed the notice of
appeal on August 1, 2020. * Because Clervrain failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to
obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny all
of Clervrain’s pending motions. 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 certificate
of service is the earliest date Clervrain could have delivered the notice to prison officials
for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276
(1988).
2