Court Opinion

ID: 9947169
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-02 21:01:09.896133+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:51.892508
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7166      Doc: 5         Filed: 03/01/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-7166

        DANIEL TAYLOR,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        UNIT MANAGER SANTOS; SERGEANT COOKE; ASSISTANT WARDEN
        RUSSELL,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
        Roanoke. Elizabeth Kay Dillon, District Judge. (7:23-cv-00608-EKD-JCH)

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

        Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Daniel Taylor, Appellant Pro Se

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7166         Doc: 5      Filed: 03/01/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Daniel Taylor applies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), 28 U.S.C.

        § 1915(b), to appeal without prepayment of fees the district court’s order dismissing his 42

        U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. 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 12, 2023. Taylor filed the notice of

        appeal on November 20, 2023, * and the district court denied his motion for an extension

        of time to appeal. Because Taylor failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an

        extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we deny

        Taylor’s application to proceed without prepayment of fees under the PLRA.

               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 notice of
        appeal is the earliest date Taylor 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).

                                                     2