Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca6-20-05027/USCOURTS-ca6-20-05027-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION

Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b)

File Name: 20a0048p.06

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

BRANDON YOUNG,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

KATHLEEN KENNEY, Commissioner, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

┐

│

│

│

│

│

│

│

┘

No. 20-5027

Appeal from the United States District Court 

or the Western District of Kentucky at Paducah.

No. 5:19-cv-00135—Thomas B. Russell, District Judge.

Decided and Filed: February 19, 2020

Before: MOORE, GILMAN, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

_________________

OPINION

_________________

PER CURIAM. “Every federal appellate court has a special obligation to satisfy itself . . . 

of its own jurisdiction . . . .” Alston v. Advanced Brands & Importing Co., 494 F.3d 562, 564 (6th 

Cir. 2007) (quoting Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83, 95 (1998)). Generally, in 

a civil case where neither the United States, a United States agency, nor a United States officer or 

employee is a party, a notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the judgment or order 

from which the party appeals is entered. 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). The 

timing requirements to file a notice of appeal are mandatory jurisdictional prerequisites that 

generally may not be waived. See Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

>

 Case: 20-5027 Document: 7-2 Filed: 02/19/2020 Page: 1
No. 20-5027 Young v. Kenney Page 2

On November 8, 2019, the district court entered its judgment dismissing Brandon Young’s 

prisoner civil-rights complaint. Absent any authorized extension of time, a notice of appeal from 

the judgment was due to be filed on or before December 9, 2019. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a); Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 26(a). Young’s notice of appeal, dated December 17, 2019, and filed in the 

district court on December 30, 2019, is late. In the notice of appeal, however, Young offers an 

excuse for his late notice. He states that he did not see the November 8, 2019 judgment until 

November 21, 2019, because “he was placed on dry cell protocol” on October 22, 2019. He states 

that he was transferred from the Kentucky State Penitentiary to the Kentucky State Reformatory 

on October 30, 2019 and placed in the prison’s psychiatric unit “pending a mental health evaluation 

and stabilization.” An exhibit attached to the notice of appeal confirms that the transfer occurred 

on October 30, 2019. Young states that inmates in the psychiatric unit are not permitted to have 

property in their possession.

Both 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c) and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) provide for the 

possibility of an extension of time to file a notice of appeal where the party seeking such an 

extension files a motion in the district court asking for more time. See § 2107(c); Fed. R. App. P. 

4(a)(5); Martin v. Sullivan, 876 F.3d 235, 237 (6th Cir. 2017). “While ‘no particular form of words 

is necessary to render a filing a motion,’ a simple notice of appeal does not suffice.” Poole v. 

Family Court of New Castle Cty., 368 F.3d 263, 268 (3d Cir. 2004) (quoting Campos v. LeFevre, 

825 F.2d 671, 676 (2d Cir. 1987)). In Pryor v. Marshall, this court refused to allow “[a] late notice 

of appeal which fails to allege excusable neglect or good cause” from “serv[ing] as a substitute” 

to a motion under Rule 4(a)(5). 711 F.2d 63, 65 (6th Cir. 1983). We ruled similarly in Martin as 

to Rule 4(a)(6), explaining that “merely filing a notice of appeal does not amount to a motion for 

more time to file an appeal.” 876 F.3d at 237. However, district courts must liberally construe a 

document that could reasonably be interpreted as a motion for an extension of time to file a notice 

of appeal or a motion to reopen the time to file an appeal. See, e.g., Hall v. Tenn. Dep’t of Corr. 

Main Hosp., 811 F.2d 605 (6th Cir. 1986) (table). Here, Young’s notice of appeal effectively reads 

as a motion for an extension of time to file an appeal and will be treated as such.

 Case: 20-5027 Document: 7-2 Filed: 02/19/2020 Page: 2
No. 20-5027 Young v. Kenney Page 3

Accordingly, we REMAND this case to the district court for a determination as to whether 

Young has shown excusable neglect or good cause to warrant an extension of time for filing a 

notice of appeal. While on limited remand, Young’s appeal is held in abeyance. Upon ruling, the 

district court shall return the case to this court for such further proceedings as may be appropriate.

 Case: 20-5027 Document: 7-2 Filed: 02/19/2020 Page: 3