James Farley v. Pittston Coal Company

Filing 920081023

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1799

JAMES R. Company,

FARLEY,

d/b/a

F

D

Electrical

Mining

Equipment

Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PITTSTON COAL COMPANY; EASTERN ASSOCIATED COAL CORPORATION; STERLING SMOKELESS COAL COMPANY; JAMES CONLEY JUSTICE, d/b/a Beckley Management Company; LAWRENCE C. RATLIFF, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Thomas E. Johnston, District Judge. (5:93-cv-00484)

Submitted:

October 21, 2008

Decided:

October 23, 2008

Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James R. Farley, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas John Hurney, Jr., Clifford Forrest Kinney, Jr., JACKSON & KELLY, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: James R. Farley seeks to appeal the district court's order denying Farley's motion to reopen this 1994 civil action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the

notice of appeal was not timely filed. The time limits for noting an appeal in a civil case are set forth in Rule 4(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, which effectuates 28 U.S.C. § 2107 (2000). See

Bowles v. Russell, 127 S. Ct. 2360, 2363 (2007).

Parties are

accorded thirty 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). A failure to file a notice of

appeal in accordance with § 2107 deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction. Bowles, 127 S. Ct. at 2366.

The district court's order was entered on the docket on April 11, 2008. 2008. The notice of appeal was filed on July 21,

Because Farley failed to file a timely notice of appeal

or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

2

facts

and

legal before

contentions the court

are and

adequately argument

presented not

in aid

the the

materials

would

decisional process. DISMISSED

3