Sabrina Davis v. Kia Motors America, Incorporat

Filing 920100319

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2296 SABRINA D. DAVIS, Plaintiff Appellant, v. KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INCORPORATED, Defendant Appellee, and KIA MOTORS OF AMERICA, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (6:08-cv-01937-RBH) Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 19, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sabrina D. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. David Christopher Marshall, Curtis L. Ott, TURNER, PADGET, GRAHAM & LANEY, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sabrina D. Davis seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendant Kia Motors America, Incorporated has moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely. 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). "[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's order was entered on the docket on August 18, 2009. 18, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on November Because Davis failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant the motion to dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid in the decisional process. DISMISSED 2

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?