Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07242/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07242-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Marlon Williams
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7242

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MARLON WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

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

Chief District Judge. (5:09-cr-00317-D-2; 5:12-cv-00027-D)

Submitted: December 19, 2014 Decided: January 14, 2015

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marlon Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Jane J. Jackson, Jennifer P. 

May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Seth Morgan Wood, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7242 Doc: 12 Filed: 01/14/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Marlon Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying the Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) motion that Williams 

filed in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) proceeding. We dismiss the 

appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was 

not timely filed. 

When the United States or its officer or agency is a 

party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty 

days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or 

order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 appealed-from order was entered on the district 

court’s docket on June 9, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed 

on or around August 20, 2014.*

 Because Williams failed to file a 

 * The notice of appeal is not dated, and Williams did not 

include proof of mailing or a notarized statement of service. 

See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1). However, the envelope in which the 

notice of appeal was mailed to the district court is postmarked 

August 22, 2014. Accordingly, for the purpose of this appeal, 

we assume that Williams tendered the notice of appeal to prison 

officials for mailing to the district court two days prior to 

the postmark date. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 

487 U.S. 266 (1988). 

Appeal: 14-7242 Doc: 12 Filed: 01/14/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

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: 14-7242 Doc: 12 Filed: 01/14/2015 Pg: 3 of 3