Court Opinion

ID: 9894958
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-03 18:00:45.106503+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:07.800166
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-12937   Document: 15-1    Date Filed: 11/03/2023   Page: 1 of 3

                                                [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                 In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                         ____________________

                              No. 23-12937
                         Non-Argument Calendar
                         ____________________

       WILLIAM T. WALKER,
                                                   Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
       versus
       ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

                                                          Defendant,

       CORIZON, LLC,
       JEFFERSON DUNN,
       WARDEN,
       SCOTT BELL,
       M.D.,
       MICHAEL BOROWICZ,
USCA11 Case: 23-12937     Document: 15-1      Date Filed: 11/03/2023    Page: 2 of 3

       2                      Opinion of the Court                23-12937

       M.D., et al.,

                                                    Defendants-Appellees.

                            ____________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Northern District of Alabama
                   D.C. Docket No. 4:20-cv-01176-CLM-NAD
                           ____________________

       Before JORDAN, NEWSOM, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
               This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdic-
       tion. The statutory time limit required William Walker to file a no-
       tice of appeal from the district court’s August 29, 2022 judgment by
       December 14, 2022, which was 30 days after the district court dis-
       posed of Walker’s motion challenging the judgment under Federal
       Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). See 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a); Fed. R. App.
       P. 4(a)(1)(A), (4)(A). However, Walker did not file his notice of ap-
       peal until August 29, 2023. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276
       (1988).
              Additionally, there is no basis in the record for relief under
       Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) or 4(a)(6). Accord-
       ingly, the notice of appeal is untimely and cannot invoke our ap-
       pellate jurisdiction. See Green v. Drug Enf’t Admin., 606 F.3d 1296,
USCA11 Case: 23-12937     Document: 15-1      Date Filed: 11/03/2023    Page: 3 of 3

       23-12937               Opinion of the Court                        3

       1300 (11th Cir. 2010) (noting that the timely filing of a notice of
       appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement, and we cannot
       entertain an appeal that is out of time).
              No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies
       with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all
       other applicable rules.