Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-16-02074/USCOURTS-ca10-16-02074-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Albuquerque Police Department
Appellee
Allen Banks
Appellee
Richard J. Berry
Appellee
City of Albuquerque
Appellee
County of Bernalillo
Appellee
Gorden Eden
Appellee
Gary K. King
Appellee
Loretta E. Lynch
Appellee
Metropolitan Detention Center
Appellee
Khalid Mohammad
Appellant
Ramon Rustin
Appellee
Harold Sennett
Appellee
United States of America
Appellee
Tom Zdunek
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

KHALID MOHAMMAD, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ALLEN BANKS, Chief, Albuquerque 

Police Department; RAMON RUSTIN, 

Chief, Metropolitan Detention Center; 

GARY K. KING, Attorney General for the 

State of New Mexico; UNITED STATES 

OF AMERICA; COUNTY OF 

BERNALILLO; CITY OF 

ALBUQUERQUE; ALBUQUERQUE 

POLICE DEPARTMENT; 

METROPOLITAN DETENTION 

CENTER; LORETTA E. LYNCH; TOM 

ZDUNEK; RICHARD J. BERRY; 

GORDEN EDEN; HAROLD SENNETT, 

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 16-2074

(D.C. No. 1:14-CV-00170-JCH-GBW)

(D. N.M.)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before BRISCOE, HARTZ, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

Pro se plaintiff Khalid Mohammad appeals the district court’s order and separate 

judgment dismissing his civil rights case. The notice of appeal was filed long after the 

filing deadline passed, however. Consequently, we conclude that this court lacks 

jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

May 5, 2016

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 16-2074 Document: 01019615285 Date Filed: 05/05/2016 Page: 1 
2

“A timely notice of appeal is both mandatory and jurisdictional.” Allender v. 

Raytheon Aircraft Co., 439 F.3d 1236, 1239 (10th Cir. 2006) (quotation omitted). In a 

civil case in which the United States or its agent is a party, a notice of appeal “must be 

filed with the district clerk within 60 days after the judgment or order appealed from is 

entered.” Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). Although Mr. Mohammad is proceeding pro se, he 

must comply with the time requirements in the procedural rules. Kay v. Bemis, 500 F.3d 

1214, 1218 (10th Cir. 2007).

In this case, final judgment was entered July 15, 2015. To be timely, the notice of 

appeal should have been filed by September 14, 2015. See Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(1)(C) 

(calculating filing deadline when due date fall on weekend day). The notice of appeal was 

not filed until April 28, 2016, more than seven months after the filing deadline expired. 

No exception to the late appeal is available to Mr. Mohammad: he did not seek relief, nor 

could he obtain it now, from the district court. See id. 4(a)(5), (a)(6). Further, the United 

States Supreme Court has made clear that federal courts “ha[ve] no authority to create 

equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 

(2007). Therefore, “[t]he time limit has run and we are without jurisdiction under the 

facts of this case.” Jenkins v. Burtzloff, 69 F.2d 460, 464 (10th Cir. 1995).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

by: Lara Smith

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 16-2074 Document: 01019615285 Date Filed: 05/05/2016 Page: 2