Court Opinion

ID: 9911831
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-20 21:01:00.810447+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:54:57.833504
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6266      Doc: 16         Filed: 12/19/2023     Pg: 1 of 3

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6266

        ALBERT MARQUAVIOUS LAMAR ANDERSON,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        JANE DOE 1; SERGEANT LEWIS; OFFICER DOLO,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:21-ct-03289-FL)

        Submitted: November 21, 2023                                Decided: December 19, 2023

        Before GREGORY and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Albert Anderson, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6266      Doc: 16         Filed: 12/19/2023     Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Albert Marquavious Lamar Anderson seeks to appeal the district court’s order and

        judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to prosecute

        and failure to comply with a court order, and the court’s subsequent order denying

        Anderson’s motion to alter or amend the judgment. 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). Where, as here,

        a party files a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment within 28 days of the

        judgment’s entry, the 30-day appeal period is tolled until disposition of that motion. Fed.

        R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(iv).

               The district court entered its order denying Anderson’s motion to alter or amend the

        judgment on January 19, 2023. Anderson filed the notice of appeal on March 15, 2023. 1

        Because Anderson failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or

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

                                                     2
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6266         Doc: 16    Filed: 12/19/2023   Pg: 3 of 3

        reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Anderson’s motions for

        general relief.

               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