Thomas F. Kaston v. Nancy A. Berryhill


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:15-cv-00539-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000163239]. Mailed to: Thomas F. Kaston 5133 Stonebluff Lane Fuquay-Varina, NC 27526. [17-1451]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1451 Doc: 14 Filed: 09/28/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1451 THOMAS F. KASTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:15-cv-00539-FL) Submitted: September 26, 2017 Decided: September 28, 2017 Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas F. Kaston, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Frances Golshani, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-1451 Doc: 14 Filed: 09/28/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Thomas F. Kaston seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and affirming the Commissioner’s decision denying Kaston’s application for disability benefits. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. ∗ When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 January 23, 2017. The notice of appeal was filed on March 27, 2017. Because Kaston 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 ∗ Although we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, we note that Kaston waived appellate review of the district court’s order by failing to file timely specific objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation despite being warned of the consequences. See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?