Joe Hines v. Northern West Virginia Operati

Filing 920100105

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1673 JOE E. HINES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA OPERATIONS; CONSOL ENERGY, INCORPORATED; CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY; LOVERIDGE MINE #22; BRENT MCCLAIN; PAM COFFMAN; HELEN BLEVINS; LYNN WAGONER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00144-FPS) Submitted: December 8, 2009 Decided: January 5, 2010 Before MICHAEL and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joe E. Hines, Appellant Pro Se. Larry Joseph Rector, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, LLP, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Joe E. Hines seeks to appeal the district court's orders granting summary judgment for some of the Appellees on his civil rights claims and dismissing his claims against the remaining Appellee for failure to effect service of process. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. 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). is "mandatory and jurisdictional." Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) This appeal period Browder v. Dir., Dep't of (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court's order was entered on the docket on May 12, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on June 12, Because Hines failed to file a 2009, one day out of time. timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 2 before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?