### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 13-30054 Summary Calendar

ROBERT BRUCE, Plaintiff-Appellant

v. BODIE LITTLE; D ANIEL ALSUP; SHERIFFS OFFICE O F WI N N PARISH; TOMMY FOSTER; WALTER HAMPTON; PHILLIP VINES, Defendants-Appellees

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:11-CV-1541

Before REAVLEY, JONES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Robert Franklin Bruce, Louisiana prisoner # 397176, filed a § 1983 complaint against several officials a t t he Winn Parish Jail. The district court dismissed the c omplaint with prejudice. Bruce filed what was effectively a motion under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Ru l e s o f C i v il Procedure, which suspended t he period to file a notice of appeal. See Bass v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture , 211 F.3d 959, 962 (5th C ir. 2000). The district court again entered U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Septem ber 13, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 13-30054 Document: 00512373045 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/13/2013No. 13-30054

judgment dismissing the complaint with prejudice. B r u c e filed a notice of appeal. The timing of Bruce’s notice o f a ppeal raises a threshold question regarding this court’s jurisdiction, which we must examine on our o wn motion, if n ecessary. See Mosley v. Cozby , 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). In a civil
case, the timely filing of a notice of appeal “is a j u r i s d i ctional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). A p arty has 30 days from entry o f judgment i n a civil case to file a notice of appeal. F E D
. R

. A P P
. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Although the appeal period was suspended when Bruce filed his motion for reconsideration, it began to run anew upon entry of t he judgment disposing of t hat motion. See F E D
. R. A P P
. P. 4 (a)(4)(A)(iv). The judgment was entered o n December 5, 2012, making B ruce’s n otice of a ppeal due on January 4, 2013. It was not received until January 9, 2013. Bruce is a prisoner, and theref o r e , h is notice o f a ppeal is deemed timely if deposited in the internal mail system o n o r before the filing deadline. S ee F E D
. R. A P P
. P. 4(c). Further, pro se prisoner pleadings in general are deemed filed at the time they are delivered to prison officials for mailing. Medley v. Thaler , 660 F.3d 833, 835 (5th Cir. 2011). However, the record does not indicate when Bruce deposited his n otice of appeal in the prison’s i nternal mail system or, alternati v e l y, when he delivered it to prison officials for mailing. Thus, we cannot determine whether we have jurisdiction. Accordingly, we hold t h e appeal in abeyance and rema n d for the limited purpose o f determining when Bruce deposited his notice of appeal in the internal mail system or delivered it to prison officials for mailing. APPEAL HELD IN ABEYANCE; LIMITED REMAND.

2 Case: 13-30054 Document: 00512373045 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/13/2013