Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-40002/USCOURTS-ca5-15-40002-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ruben Solis Anderson
Appellant
FNU Alexander
Appellee
FNU Oakes
Appellee
FNU Walter
Appellee
G.I. Department
Appellee
F. Gooden
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40002

RUBEN SOLIS ANDERSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

MS. FNU WALTER, Head of Classification Department; G.I. DEPARTMENT, 

All Sergeants, Lieutenants, Correctional Officers, and Mr. Canno; CAPTAIN 

FNU OAKES, Segregation Department; CAPTAIN F. GOODEN, Segregation 

Department; MAJOR FNU ALEXANDER, Segregation Department, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:14-CV-131

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ruben Solis Anderson, Texas prisoner # 596151, moves this court for 

authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) following the district court’s 

dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. This court has a duty to examine the 

basis of its jurisdiction, sua sponte, if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 4, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40002 Document: 00513296014 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/04/2015
No. 15-40002

2

659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). A timely notice of appeal is a jurisdictional 

requirement in a civil case. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 213-14 (2007).

Anderson’s notice of appeal was untimely because it was filed over 30 

days after entry of final judgment. See FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(1)(A); Smith v. 

Mine Safety Appliances Co., 691 F.2d 724, 725 (5th Cir. 1982). Federal Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5)(A) does not assist Anderson with respect to the 

untimeliness of his notice of appeal. Given the foregoing, this appeal must be 

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION DENIED.

 Case: 15-40002 Document: 00513296014 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/04/2015