Aubrey Dickson, Sr. v. Maryland National Park Plannin
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
AUBREY LEON DICKSON, SR., Plaintiff Appellant, v. MARYLAND NATIONAL PARK PLANNING COMMISSION, Defendant Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Robert W. Titus, District Judge. (8:09-cv-01429-RWT)
March 16, 2010
March 24, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aubrey Leon Dickson, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Jared Michael McCarthy, MARYLAND NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK & PLANNING COMMISSION, Riverdale, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Aubrey Leon Dickson, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court's orders granting the Defendant's motions to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment and denying Dickson's second motion to amend or alter judgment. 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 orders were entered on the docket on October 13, 2009 and November 25, 2009. was filed on December 31, 2009. The notice of appeal
Because Dickson failed to file
a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. oral argument because in the the facts and legal before We dispense with contentions the court are and
argument would not aid 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?