Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-01815/USCOURTS-ca4-16-01815-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ethiel Calderon
Appellee
Angel Jose Miranda
Appellee
Joseph Pirela
Appellant
Lydia Nicole Roberts
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1815

JOSEPH PIRELA,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ANGEL JOSE MIRANDA; LYDIA NICOLE ROBERTS; ETHIEL CALDERON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief 

District Judge. (5:15-cv-00607-D)

Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided: October 17, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Pirela, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1815 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/17/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Pirela seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

dismissing his complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). 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 June 

9, 2016. The notice of appeal was filed on July 18, 2016. Because 

Pirela 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: 16-1815 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/17/2016 Pg: 2 of 2