Michael Wagner v. J. Stouffer

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:10-cv-01944-AW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998666208]. Mailed to: Michael Wagner. [11-6462]

Appeal: 11-6462

Document: 15

Date Filed: 08/30/2011

Page: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6462

MICHAEL JOSEPH WAGNER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
J. MICHAEL STOUFFER, Commissioner; J. TROVILLIAN, Warden,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Alexander Williams, Jr., District
Judge. (8:10-cv-01944-AW)

Submitted:

August 25, 2011

Decided:

August 30, 2011

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Joseph Wagner, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael O’Connor
Doyle, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6462

Document: 15

Date Filed: 08/30/2011

Page: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Michael

Joseph

Wagner

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West
2006 & Supp. 2011) petition.

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).

“[T]he timely

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional
requirement.”
The

Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).
district

court’s

final

order

was

entered

on

January 12, 2011, and the notice of appeal was deposited in the
prison’s internal mail system on March 28, 2011.

See Fed. R.

App.

276

P.

4(c);

Houston

v.

Lack,

487

U.S.

266,

(1988).

Because Wagner failed to file a timely notice of appeal, to
obtain an extension, or to file a timely motion to reopen the
appeal period, we 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 the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2