United States v. Battle

408 F. App'x 743
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Battle. Read the opinion of the Court — 370 F. App'x 426
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 21, 2011·No. 10-7470·Unpublished

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Terry Battle seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion to vacate. 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 sixty 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, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on April 28, 2010. The notice of appeal was filed on October 18, 2010. Because Battle 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Battle, 408 F. App'x 743 (4th Cir. 2011).

408 F. App'x 743 (United States v. Battle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bowles v. Russell
551 U.S. 205 (Supreme Court, 2007)