Court Opinion

ID: 4238156
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-01-22 20:00:24.104214+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:03.213370
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                      No. 17-2264

TORI KEON THOMPSON,

                    Plaintiff - Appellant,

             v.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL
SERVICES, Child Support Division,

                    Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. (3:17-cv-02113-CMC)

Submitted: January 18, 2018                                       Decided: January 22, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tori Keon Thompson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Tori Keon Thompson seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. 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 20, 2017. The

notice of appeal was filed on October 27, 2017. Because Thompson failed to file a timely

notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny

leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                 DISMISSED

                                              2