U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2003

Panwala v. Southeastern Regional Medical Center

Panwala v. Southeastern Regional Medical Center
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided May 1, 2003 · Niemeyer, Gregory, Shedd
62 F. App'x 526

Panwala v. Southeastern Regional Medical Center

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Naitik D. Panwala seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting his former employer, Southeastern Regional Medical Center, summary judgment in his civil action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded thirty 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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on November 8, 2002. The notice of appeal was filed on December 11, 2002. Because Panwala 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.

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