William Davis, Jr. v. Melanie Shekita

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:12-cv-00504-H. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999976765]. Mailed to: William Scott Davis Jr.. [16-1965]

Appeal: 16-1965

Doc: 10

Filed: 11/29/2016

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1965

WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR., on behalf of and as next friend
of J.F.D., a minor,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
J.F.D., a minor,
Plaintiff,
v.
MELANIE A. SHEKITA, Individually and as a Wake County NC
Assistant District Attorney for the State of North Carolina;
MICHELLE SAVAGE, individually and as a Police Detective for
the Cary North Carolina Police Department; DANIELLE DOYLE,
individually and as a Wake County North Carolina Department
of Health and Human Services Child Protective Services
Social Worker; ERIC CRAIG CHASSE, individually and as a Wake
County North Carolina Family Court Judge; MIKE EASLEY,
individually and as Governor of the State of North Carolina;
BEVERLY PERDUE, individually and as Governor of the State of
North Carolina,
Defendants - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Malcolm J. Howard,
Senior District Judge. (5:12-cv-00504-H)

Submitted:

November 22, 2016

Decided:

November 29, 2016

Appeal: 16-1965

Doc: 10

Before DIAZ and
Circuit Judge.

Filed: 11/29/2016

THACKER,

Pg: 2 of 4

Circuit

Judges,

and

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Scott Davis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-1965

Doc: 10

Filed: 11/29/2016

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
William

Scott

Davis,

Jr.,

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s text order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion in a
closed 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action.

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 5, 2016.

The notice of appeal was filed on August 18, 2016. *

Because Davis failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to
obtain

an

extension

dismiss the appeal.
facts

and

legal

or

reopening

of

the

appeal

period,

we

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are

*

adequately

presented

in

the

For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date
appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could
have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to
the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266
(1988).

3

Appeal: 16-1965

Doc: 10

materials

before

Filed: 11/29/2016

this

court

Pg: 4 of 4

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

4