Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-01476/USCOURTS-ca4-15-01476-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1476

HAZEL L. SANDERS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ENOS CONTRACTORS; TRACY RICHARDS; BERKSHIRE PROPERTY 

ADVISORS, LLC,

Defendants – Appellees,

BERKSHIRE PROPERTIES,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. 

(1:13-cv-02590-ELH)

Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hazel L. Sanders, Appellant Pro Se. Rick M. Grams, Letecia G. 

Rollins, SAGAL, FILBERT, QUASNEY & BETTEN, P.A., Towson, 

Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1476 Doc: 15 Filed: 08/31/2015 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Hazel L. Sanders seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

denying her motion for appointment of counsel. 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 

January 7, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on April 27, 

2015. Because Sanders 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: 15-1476 Doc: 15 Filed: 08/31/2015 Pg: 2 of 2