Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02004/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02004-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Patrick D. Blake
Appellee
Commonwealth of Virginia
Appellee
Judge Hammons
Appellee
Judge Hansen
Appellee
Judge Hodges
Appellee
State of Texas
Appellee
John S. Stritzinger
Appellant
Dr. Frances Tunney
Appellee
Dr. Vyas
Appellee
Judge Woolard
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2004

JOHN S. STRITZINGER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; STATE OF TEXAS; DR. VYAS, Eastern 

States Hospital; DR. FRANCES TUNNEY, Charleston SC - Doctor; 

PATRICK D. BLAKE, Wilcox Savage - Norfolk Verizon Outside 

Counsel; JUDGE HANSEN, 2nd Judicial Circuit of Virginia; 

JUDGE WOOLARD, 2nd Judicial Circuit of Virginia; JUDGE 

HODGES, 2nd Judicial Circuit of Virginia; JUDGE HAMMONS, 2nd 

Judicial Circuit of Virginia Re Bond,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District 

Judge. (3:15-cv-00658-TLW)

Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 17, 2015

Before GREGORY and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John S. Stritzinger, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2004 Doc: 17 Filed: 12/17/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

John Stritzinger seeks to appeal the district court’s 

orders adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss 

his complaint and denying reconsideration. 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 denying the timely filed motion 

for reconsideration was entered on the docket on July 9, 2015. 

See Fed. R. Civ. 59(e); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A). The notice 

of appeal was filed on September 1, 2015. Because Stritzinger

failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an 

extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the 

appeal. We deny the motion for leave to file electronically and 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials

Appeal: 15-2004 Doc: 17 Filed: 12/17/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-2004 Doc: 17 Filed: 12/17/2015 Pg: 3 of 3