Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-01058/USCOURTS-ca4-16-01058-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Life Care Services LLC
Appellee
Masonic Eastern Star Home of N.C.
Appellee
Ronald L. Tuck
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1058

RONALD L. TUCK,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MASONIC EASTERN STAR HOME OF N.C., d/b/a Whitestone 

Retirement Community; LIFE CARE SERVICES LLC,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, 

District Judge. (1:15-cv-00684-CCE-JLW)

Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 20, 2016

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald L. Tuck, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Douglas McKnight, 

OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1058 Doc: 14 Filed: 05/20/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Ronald L. Tuck seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

dismissing his civil action alleging employment discrimination. 

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 

December 14, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed 31 days 

later, on January 14, 2016. Because Tuck 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: 16-1058 Doc: 14 Filed: 05/20/2016 Pg: 2 of 2