Court Opinion

ID: 9388668
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-21 14:00:52.570883+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:21.784990
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-1323    Document: 15     Page: 1   Filed: 04/21/2023

           NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

                     RAJ K. PATEL,
                    Plaintiff-Appellant

                             v.

                    UNITED STATES,
                    Defendant-Appellee
                  ______________________

                        2023-1323
                  ______________________

     Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims
 in No. 1:22-cv-00734-LAS, Senior Judge Loren A. Smith.
                  ______________________

 PER CURIAM.
                        ORDER
     Raj K. Patel appeals from the United States Court of
 Federal Claims’ August 12, 2022, judgment dismissing his
 complaint. In response to the court’s March 2, 2023, show
 cause order, the United States urges dismissal of this ap-
 peal as untimely. Mr. Patel “move[s] . . . to allow the
Case: 23-1323     Document: 15      Page: 2    Filed: 04/21/2023

 2                                                  PATEL   v. US

 appeal,” ECF No. 13 at 1, and suggests that this case may
 be consolidated with Appeal No. 2023-1325. *
     The timely filing of a notice of appeal from the Court of
 Federal Claims is “a jurisdictional requirement” and “not
 subject to equitable tolling.” Marandola v. United States,
 518 F.3d 913, 914 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (citation omitted). To be
 timely, a notice of appeal must be received by the Court of
 Federal Claims within 60 days after the entry of final judg-
 ment. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2107, 2522; Fed. R. App. P.
 4(a)(1)(B); Fed. Cir. R. 1(a)(1)(C). In this case, it is undis-
 puted that Mr. Patel’s notice of appeal was filed 137 days
 after final judgment. Thus, we lack jurisdiction over Mr.
 Patel’s untimely appeal. To the extent that Mr. Patel’s re-
 sponse argues that this appeal can be deemed timely based
 on this court’s jurisdiction over his separate appeal involv-
 ing a different underlying case, we must reject that argu-
 ment at least because his notice of appeal in that case filed
 on December 21, 2022, was likewise not filed within 60
 days of entry of final judgment in this case.
     Accordingly,
     IT IS ORDERED THAT:
     (1) The appeal is dismissed.
     (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
                                     FOR THE COURT

 April 21, 2023                      /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
      Date                           Peter R. Marksteiner
                                     Clerk of Court

     *  The court notes that it granted the United States’
 motion for summary affirmance in Appeal No. 2023-1325
 on March 7, 2023.