Court Opinion

ID: 9900066
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-18 21:00:33.983797+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:59.277323
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1630      Doc: 8          Filed: 08/28/2023   Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-1630

        STANLEY ABLER,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Beth P. Gesner, Magistrate Judge. (1:18-cv-03668-BPG)

        Submitted: August 24, 2023                                        Decided: August 28, 2023

        Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Stanley Abler, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1630         Doc: 8      Filed: 08/28/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Stanley Abler seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting Defendant summary

        judgment on Abler’s discrimination claims, which were brought pursuant to the

        Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 to 796l. We dismiss the appeal

        for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

               In civil cases, parties have 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 entered its order on March 18, 2022, and subsequently granted

        Abler two extensions of the appeal period, the last deadline being June 2, 2022. Abler did

        not file the notice of appeal, though, until June 6, 2022. Because Abler failed to file a

        timely notice of appeal—despite receiving two extensions to the filing deadline—and

        likewise did not seek to reopen the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Abler’s

        motions on ethics issues the district court did not address, for a hearing, and to appoint

        counsel.

               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