Case Name: BASIE & FRITZ, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Claudia HOUSTON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-04-28
Citations: 324 F. App'x 626
Docket Number: No. 07-55842
Parties: BASIE & FRITZ, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Claudia HOUSTON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: GRABER, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 324
Pages: 626–626

Head Matter:
BASIE & FRITZ, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Claudia HOUSTON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-55842.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 13, 2009.
Filed April 28, 2009.
Daniel J. Horwitz, Law Office of David Horwitz, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.
Claudia Houston, Encinitas, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: GRABER, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Claudia Houston appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing this collection action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Houston's notices of appeal were untimely. Houston's first notice of appeal was filed 36 days after entry of judgment. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Houston's second notice of appeal was filed more than 14 days after entry of the district court's order reopening the time to file an appeal. See Fed. RApp. P. 4(a)(6). "A timely notice of appeal is a non-waivable jurisdictional requirement." Stephanie-Cardona LLC v. Smith's Food & Drug Ctrs., Inc., 476 F.3d 701, 703 (9th Cir.2007).
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.