Dawn Norman v. Rhoda Patnelttli

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1102
DAWN NORMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
RHODA PATNELTTLI; BOENCA NORMAN; ISABELLE HILLARD; CLAUDETTE
REVIES; EURINCE RUSSELL; LILLIE NORMAN; GEORGE CORSELLI;
CLARENCE NORMAN; SANDRA RUSSELL; HAROLD RUSSELL; LAURA
JACKSON; WILLIANETTA WILLIAMS; DEE RODRIGUEZ; EIDDIE SANDRA
HAROLD; ANABELLA RANDOLPH; RALPH RANDOLPH; PATRICK
PATNETTLI; SHOFIA WILLIAMS; NEAL CARTER; MARGARET SIMMONS;
KIRK JACKSON; GAYE CORSELLI; TATANNA CORSELLI; TIFFANY
CORSELLI; ERENEST HOLMES; ROXANNE NORMAN; BEVERLY SIMMONS;
HERBERT NORMAN; JAMES HILLIARD; THELMA JENKINS,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:12-cv-00581-JRS)
Submitted: August 29, 2013 Decided: September 3, 2013
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dawn Norman, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Dawn Norman seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing without prejudice her civil case for failure to state
a claim. 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 October 9, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed over three
months later, on January 18, 2013. Because Norman 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
3