Court Opinion

ID: 4254084
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-03-13 19:00:24.321108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:34:50.456107
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                      No. 17-2331

CHRISTOPHER LEE JOHNSON,

                    Plaintiff - Appellant,

             v.

APPLE, INC.; TIM COOK,

                    Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Greenville. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (6:17-cv-02149-MGL)

Submitted: March 5, 2018                                          Decided: March 13, 2018

Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher Lee Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Christopher Lee Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the

magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing Johnson’s civil complaint without

prejudice. 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 September 21, 2017. The

notice of appeal was filed on November 6, 2017. Because Johnson 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 the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

                                                                                 DISMISSED

                                              2