Court Opinion

ID: 9929732
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-03 21:00:47.50544+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:47:40.140929
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1984      Doc: 10         Filed: 02/02/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1984

        RUFUS JULIUS ANDERSON,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        J. A. PIPER ROOFING CO.,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Greenville. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (6:21-cv-02901-DCC)

        Submitted: January 30, 2024                                       Decided: February 2, 2024

        Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Rufus J. C. Anderson, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1984      Doc: 10         Filed: 02/02/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Rufus Julius Anderson seeks to appeal the district court’s orders granting Defendant

        summary judgment on Anderson’s employment discrimination claims, brought pursuant to

        Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17; and the

        Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 12213, and denying

        Anderson’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We dismiss this 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 Anderson Rule 59(e) relief on April 13,

        2023, and mailed a physical copy of the order to Anderson on June 1, 2023. Anderson

        filed the underlying notice of appeal on September 18, 2023. Because Anderson 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

                                                    2