Joseph Pirela v. Angel Miranda

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:15-cv-00607-D Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999948102]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-1815]

Appeal: 16-1815

Doc: 9

Filed: 10/17/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1815

JOSEPH PIRELA,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ANGEL JOSE MIRANDA; LYDIA NICOLE ROBERTS; ETHIEL CALDERON,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief
District Judge. (5:15-cv-00607-D)

Submitted:

October 13, 2016

Decided:

October 17, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Pirela, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1815

Doc: 9

Filed: 10/17/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Joseph Pirela seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing

his

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)

complaint

as

frivolous

(2012).

We

dismiss

pursuant

the

appeal

to

28

for

U.S.C.

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 June
9, 2016.

The notice of appeal was filed on July 18, 2016.

Because

Pirela 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