Court Opinion

ID: 9391099
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-29 21:00:33.790982+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:39.411760
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6203      Doc: 9          Filed: 04/28/2023   Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                                 No. 23-6203

        In re: GREGORY K. CLINTON, Pro Se Litigant,

                             Petitioner.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
        Clarksburg. Thomas S. Kleeh, Chief District Judge. (1:22-mc-00049-TSK)

        Submitted: April 25, 2023                                           Decided: April 28, 2023

        Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Gregory K. Clinton, Petitioner Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6203         Doc: 9     Filed: 04/28/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Gregory K. Clinton seeks to appeal the district court’s amended order imposing a

        prefiling injunction. 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 December 14, 2022. Clinton filed the notice

        of appeal on February 22, 2023. * Because Clinton 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 this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                      DISMISSED

               *
                For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
        appeal is the earliest date Clinton could have delivered the notice to prison officials for
        mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

                                                    2