Court Opinion

ID: 9895019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-03 21:00:45.955922+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:28.178746
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2181      Doc: 35        Filed: 11/02/2023    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                  FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-2181

        MITHUN BANERJEE,

                            Plaintiffs - Appellant,

                     and

        BANERJEE HOLDINGS, LLC,

                            Plaintiff,

                     v.

        BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; THE CORPORATION TRUST, INCORPORATED;
        TESSA L. FREDERICK; JEFFREY P. REILLY; MILES & STOCKBRIDGE P. C.,
        100 Light Street; ROSALYN TANG; STEPHEN J. MCAULIFFE, III; MILES &
        STOCKBRIDGE, P. C., 11 N. Washington St # 700,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
        Theodore D. Chuang, District Judge. (8:21-cv-03125-TDC)

        Submitted: October 31, 2023                                Decided: November 2, 2023

        Before HARRIS and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2181      Doc: 35         Filed: 11/02/2023    Pg: 2 of 3

        Mithun Banerjee, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2181         Doc: 35      Filed: 11/02/2023     Pg: 3 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Mithun Banerjee seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing his complaint

        in his civil action and denying reconsideration. 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 denying reconsideration on September 12, 2022.

        Banerjee filed the notice of appeal on November 10, 2022. Because Banerjee failed to file

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

        deny Banerjee’s motion to appoint counsel 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

                                                     3