Keith Ashe v. PNC Financial Services Group

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:15-cv-00144-PWG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999802939].. [15-2566]

Appeal: 15-2566

Doc: 16

Filed: 04/25/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2566

KEITH ALEXANDER ASHE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Paul W. Grimm, District Judge.
(8:15-cv-00144-PWG)

Submitted:

April 21, 2016

Decided:

April 25, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith Alexander Ashe, Appellant Pro Se. Naresh Kilaru, Mark S.
Sommers, FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP,
Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2566

Doc: 16

Filed: 04/25/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Keith Alexander Ashe seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing his civil complaint for trademark infringement
as barred by collateral estoppel.

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
November

17,

2015.

December 18, 2015.

The

notice

of

appeal

was

filed

on

Because Ashe 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