UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

________________ _________________ GERALD E. VALLEJOS, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. LOVELACE MEDICAL CENTER; THE 2ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, NEW MEXICO, Defendants - Appellees, No. 17-2090 (D.C. No. 1:17-CV -00183-P JK-WPL) (D.N.M.)

________________ _________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

________________ _________________ Before LUCERO , O’BRIEN , and MORITZ , Circuit Judges.

________________ _________________ Proceeding pro se, Gerald Vallejos appeal s the district court’ s dismissal of his complaint. 1 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Exercising de novo review, see Smith v.
United States , 561 F.3d 1090, 1098 (10th Cir. 2009), we affirm.

* After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument wouldn’t mate rially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Ci r. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment isn’t binding precedent, except under the doctr ines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. But it may be cited for its persuasive value. See Fed. R. App. P. 32.1; 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 1 Because Vallejos proceeds pro se, we liberally construe his filings. See Gallagher v. Shelton , 587 F.3d 1063, 1067 ( 10th Cir. 2009). But it’ s not our role to act as his advocate. See id. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### August 24, 2017
Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court2 Vallejos brought suit in federal district court against Lovelace Health System, Inc. (Lovelace) 2 and the Second Judicial District Court of New Mexico, alleging “[h]onest services [f]raud.” R. vol. 1, 7. On April 14, 2017, the district court dismissed the complaint against the Second Judicial District Court without prejudice for lack of subject matter ju risdiction. It subsequently granted Lovelace’s motion to dismiss on May 5, 2017, and entered judgmen t to that effect on May 8, 2017. On appeal, Vallejos argues that the distri ct court erred in granting Lovelace’s
motion to dismiss. 3 Specifically, he asserts that the district cour t erred in failing to recognize “that the state district court . . . granted [Vallejos] judgment on his defamation claim.” R. vol. 1, 107. But we ha ve reviewed the tran script that Vallejos cites and agree with the fede ral district court: the state district court unambiguously granted summary judgment to Lovel ace—and not to Vallejos—on Vallejos’

2 Vallejos refers to Lovelace as “Lovel ace Medical Center.” R. vol. 1, 5. But Lovelace asserts that this isn’t its actual title. 3 To the extent Vallejos seeks to challenge the dist rict court’s April 14, 2017 order dismissing his complaint against the S econd Judicial District Court, we lack jurisdiction to review that or der; Vallejos filed his notice of appeal on June 2, 2017, and he designated therein onl y the district court’s May 5, 2017 and May 8, 2017 order and final judgment. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) (“In a civil case, . . . the notice of appeal . . . must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from.”); Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B) (requiring notice of appeal to “designate the judgment, or der, or part thereof being appealed”); Williams v. Akers , 837 F.3d 1075, 1078 (10th Cir. 2016) (“Like Rule 4(a)(1)(A)’s 30- day filing deadline, Rule 3(c)(1)(B)’s desi gnation requirement is jurisdictional.”). Likewise, because Vallejos fail ed to timely appeal the di strict court’s June 27, 2017 order granting Lovelace’s motion for attorney’s fees, we lack jurisdiction to review that order as well. See E.E.O.C. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. , 187 F.3d 1241, 1250 (10th Cir. 1999) (“[A] supplemental notice of appeal is required for us to have jurisdiction over an [attorney’s fee] issue that become s final subsequent to the initial notice of appeal.”).3 defamation claim. Because Vallejos doesn’t id entify any other pote ntial errors in the
district court’s ru ling, we affirm.

Entered for the Court
Nancy L. Moritz Circuit Judge