Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-01141/USCOURTS-ca4-15-01141-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 950
Nature of Suit: Constitutionality of State Statutes
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1141

ELLIS HARLEY BARBER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CHIEF JUDGE HOWARD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT; CHIEF JUDGE HOWARD 

COUNTY DISTRICT COURT; COMMANDERS AND CHIEFS OF SPECIFIC 

JURIS COURT HOUSE ELLICOTT CITY MD,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District 

Judge. (1:14-cv-01826-JFM)

Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 21, 2015

Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ellis Harley Barber, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1141 Doc: 5 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Ellis Harley Barber seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing his complaint against state court judges as 

barred by the doctrine of judicial immunity. 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 

June 20, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on January 15, 

2015. Because Barber 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

Appeal: 15-1141 Doc: 5 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 2 of 2