U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1991

Roy M. Sexton, Sr. v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services

Roy M. Sexton, Sr. v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided December 26, 1991
952 F.2d 396; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 32763; 1991 WL 273760 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Roy M. Sexton, Sr. v. Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services

Opinion

952 F.2d 396

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Roy M. SEXTON, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services,
Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-1191.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 5, 1991.
Decided Dec. 26, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. (CA-89-157-B), Glen M. Williams, Senior District Judge.

Roy Sexton, appellant pro se.

Ray Burton Fitzgerald, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Roanoke, Va.; Lori Riye Karimoto, Department of Health & Human Services, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

W.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Roy Sexton noted this appeal outside the sixty-day appeal period established by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), and failed to move for an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5). The time periods established by Fed.R.App.P. 4 are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore grant the Appellee's motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively.

2

DISMISSED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.