Court Opinion

ID: 9945700
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-28 15:01:15.658381+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:37.978703
License: Public Domain

Case: 24-1148   Document: 6      Page: 1   Filed: 02/28/2024

          NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                 ______________________

        REGINALD NATHANIEL MALLARD,
               Plaintiff-Appellant

                            v.

                   UNITED STATES,
                   Defendant-Appellee
                 ______________________

                       2024-1148
                 ______________________

    Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims
in No. 1:23-cv-01504-EMR, Judge Eleni M. Roumel.
                 ______________________

 Before MOORE, Chief Judge, TARANTO and CHEN, Circuit
                       Judges.
PER CURIAM.
                       ORDER
    On October 13, 2023, Reginald Nathaniel Mallard filed
a notice of appeal at the United States Court of Federal
Claims. Because Mr. Mallard’s case was still proceeding
before that court, this court directed the parties to show
cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction. In response, the United States urges dismis-
sal. Mr. Mallard has not responded.
Case: 24-1148      Document: 6    Page: 2    Filed: 02/28/2024

2                                              MALLARD v. US

     An appellant must file a notice of appeal that “desig-
nates “the judgment” or “appealable order” from “which the
appeal is being taken.” Fed R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B). This re-
quirement is “jurisdictional in nature, and [its] satisfaction
is a prerequisite to appellate review.” Smith v. Barry, 502
U.S. 244, 248 (1992) (citation omitted). Mr. Mallard’s no-
tice of appeal designates an October 11, 2023 order. * How-
ever, no order from that date appears on the trial court’s
docket. At the time Mr. Mallard filed his appeal, the only
orders listed on the docket were (1) an order accepting Mr.
Mallard’s non-compliant document and (2) an order grant-
ing Mr. Mallard leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Mr.
Mallard’s notice of appeal does not indicate any intent to
seek review of those favorable decisions.
     The Court of Federal Claims later entered final judg-
ment on November 17, 2023, but the notice of appeal was
filed before that date and likewise cannot be understood as
intending to seek review of that judgment. As Mr. Mallard
was specifically informed in the show cause order, if he
wished to appeal from the final judgment in his case, he
needed to timely file a new notice of appeal or amend his
existing notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii).
Because he did neither, the final judgment is not properly
before this court. Since Mr. Mallard’s notice of appeal fails
to identify any appealable order, we dismiss.
    Accordingly,
    IT IS ORDERED THAT:
    (1) The appeal is dismissed.

    *   Mr. Mallard’s notice of appeal also identifies eleven
“Points of Appeal,” but there is no apparent connection be-
tween those points and any of the orders issued by the trial
court. ECF No. 1-2 at 2–3.
Case: 24-1148    Document: 6    Page: 3    Filed: 02/28/2024

MALLARD v. US                                            3

    (2) Each party shall bear its own costs.
                                           FOR THE COURT

 February 28, 2024
       Date