Opinion ID: 165618
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: motion to dismiss appeal

Text: 11 First, we consider Defendants' motion to dismiss this appeal. It is beyond dispute that Mr. Hays was tardy by two months in filing the opening brief. See Fed. R.App. P. 31(a)(1). Moreover, he offers no explanation for the delay. See Response to Motion of Appellees to Dismiss Appeal (May 13, 2004). Finally, Rule 31(c) specifically states that [i]f an appellant fails to file a brief within the time provided by this rule, or within an extended time, an appellee may move to dismiss the appeal. Fed. R.App. P. 31(c). 12 The untimely filing of a brief is not jurisdictional, however, and we have discretion to excuse a late filing. See Bartell v. Aurora Public Schs., 263 F.3d 1143, 1146 (10th Cir.2001). As such, it is the practice of this Court not [to] grant motions to dismiss for failure to follow Fed. R.App. P. 31(a)(1). Id. Thus, even though a two-month delay is far from a de minimis violation and Rule 31 permits such a motion, we deny Defendants' motion to dismiss this appeal. We expect Mr. Hays to refrain from such dilatory conduct in future appearances before this Court.