Curtis Glenn Moorer v. Mr. Luthi

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 6:15-cv-01921-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999722108]. Mailed to: Curtis Moorer. [15-1762]

Appeal: 15-1762

Doc: 18

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1762

CURTIS GLENN MOORER, a/k/a Curtis G. Moorer,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MR. LUTHI, New Carolina Mortgage; CHRISTOPHER EDWARDS,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(6:15-cv-01921-RBH)

Submitted:

December 17, 2015

Decided:

December 21, 2015

Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Curtis Glenn Moorer, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1762

Doc: 18

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Curtis Glenn Moorer seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting
dismissing

the

recommendation

Moorer’s

jurisdiction.

of

complaint

the

for

magistrate

lack

of

judge

and

subject-matter

We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction

because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded 30 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 May
29, 2015.

Moorer filed the notice of appeal on July 7, 2015.

Because Moorer 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