David R. Corbin v. Judge Talmadge Baggett


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:17-cv-00129-CCE-LPA. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000163325]. Mailed to: David R. Corbin. [17-1665]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1665 Doc: 8 Filed: 09/28/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1665 DAVID R. CORBIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JUDGE TALMADGE BAGGETT; BILLY WEST, DISTRICT ATTORNEY; THE WILLIFORD LAW FIRM; ELLEN HANCOCK, TRIAL ADMINISTRATOR OF THE COURT; CHRISTA BAKER, TRIAL ADMINISTRATOR OF THE COURT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:17-cv-00129-CCE-LPA) 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 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David R. Corbin, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-1665 Doc: 8 Filed: 09/28/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: David R. Corbin seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. 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 April 21, 2017. The notice of appeal was filed on May 24, 2017. Because Corbin 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

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?