Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02520/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02520-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2520

RUSSELL F. WALKER,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

J.P. THOMAS & CO. INC.; TOWN OF ABERDEEN, NORTH CAROLINA; 

OFFICER J. J. SMITH,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Joe L. Webster, 

Magistrate Judge. (1:14-cv-00738-JLW)

Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: February 29, 2016

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Russell F. Walker, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2520 Doc: 22 Filed: 02/29/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Russell F. Walker seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s 

order dismissing his complaint with prejudice. We dismiss the 

appeal 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’s order was entered on the docket on 

September 29, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on 

December 7, 2015. Because Walker 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 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

Appeal: 15-2520 Doc: 22 Filed: 02/29/2016 Pg: 2 of 2