Court Opinion

ID: 9947172
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-02 21:01:16.959476+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:51.942274
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7089      Doc: 20        Filed: 03/01/2024   Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                  FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-7089

        BILAL A. AL-HAQQ, a/k/a Michael Dion McFadden, a/k/a Michael D. Mcfadden,
        a/k/a Bilal Abdullah Al-Haqq,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        WARDEN EVONNE WILLINGHAM; ASSOCIATE WARDEN ELAINE
        FREEMAN; BRYAN P. STIRLING; ASSOCIATE WARDEN ANN SHEPPARD,

                            Defendants - Appellees,

                     and

        SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; WARDEN BRIAN
        KENDALL; NURSE GRISSOM; PATTY BRITT-POOSER; MS. BROWN,
        Grievance Coordinator,

                            Defendants.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Charleston. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (2:21-cv-04139-DCC)

        Submitted: February 27, 2024                                  Decided: March 1, 2024

        Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7089      Doc: 20         Filed: 03/01/2024    Pg: 2 of 3

        Bilal A. Al-Haqq, Appellant Pro Se. Norma Anne Turner Jett, NESS & JETT, LLC,
        Bamberg, South Carolina, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7089         Doc: 20      Filed: 03/01/2024     Pg: 3 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Bilal A. Al-Haqq seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the

        recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil action.

        Appellees move to dismiss the appeal. 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 on October 3, 2022. Al-Haqq filed the notice of

        appeal on October 13, 2023. * Because Al-Haqq failed to file a timely notice of appeal or

        to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant Appellees’ motion 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

               *
                  For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the cover
        letter for the notice of appeal is the earliest date Al-Haqq could have delivered the notice
        to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack,
        487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

                                                     3