U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1996

King v. Ives

King v. Ives
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided November 1, 1996

King v. Ives

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2120

JOAN A. KING, Plaintiff - Appellant, and ROBERT L. STEPHENSON, Plaintiff, versus PERRY N. IVES; PORETSKY MANAGEMENT, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-1931-AW) Submitted: October 17, 1996 Decided: November 1, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joan A. King, Appellant Pro Se. H. Patrick Donohue, ARMSTRONG, DONOHUE, & CEPPOS, CHARTERED, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period established by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to relief under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). 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)). The district court entered its order on June 26, 1996; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on August 2, 1996. 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 dis- miss 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

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