Naranjo v. Roe
This text of 85 F. App'x 598 (Naranjo v. Roe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER
This appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because petitioner Joel Heredia Naranjo failed to file a timely notice of appeal and the district court found that Naranjo does not qualify for reopening of time under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). The mandate issued on January 2, 2004 is hereby withdrawn.
DISMISSED
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
85 F. App'x 598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/naranjo-v-roe-ca9-2004.