Johnathon Kelly v. J. Streeval
Johnathon Kelly v. J. Streeval
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-7388
JOHNATHON KELLY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN J. C. STREEVAL,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, Chief District Judge. (7:21-cv-00382-MFU-JCH)
Submitted: January 20, 2022 Decided: January 25, 2022
Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Johnathon Kelly, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Johnathon Kelly seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without
prejudice his
28 U.S.C. § 2241petition for lack of jurisdiction. 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 in a civil case, the notice
of appeal must be filed no more than 60 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(2007).
The district court entered its order of dismissal on July 8, 2021. Kelly filed the
notice of appeal on September 9. * Because Kelly 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 this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on Kelly’s notice of appeal is the earliest date Kelly could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack,
487 U.S. 266, 276(1988).
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished