Lavern Crump v. Montgomery County Board of Ed

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:12-cv-03378-PWG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999516904]. Mailed to: Crump. [14-2105]

Appeal: 14-2105

Doc: 13

Filed: 01/26/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2105

LAVERN R. CRUMP,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; JERRY D. WEAST; CARMEN
L. VAN ZUTPHEN,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:12cv-03378-PWG)

Submitted:

January 22, 2015

Decided:

January 26, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lavern R. Crump, Appellant Pro Se. Christine M. Collins, Edward
Barry Lattner, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Rockville, Maryland,
for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-2105

Doc: 13

Filed: 01/26/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Lavern R. Crump seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

her

employment

discrimination

action.

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.”

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

The district court’s order was entered on the docket
on October 25, 2013.
14, 2014.

The notice of appeal was filed on October

Because Crump 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 facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2