USCA4 Appeal: 21-2068 Doc: 34 Filed: 12/05/2022 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-2068

GEORGE KARIUKI,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE,

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 21-2069

GEORGE KARIUKI,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-cv-00341-D)

Submitted: November 9, 2022 Decided: December 5, 2022 USCA4 Appeal: 21-2068 Doc: 34 Filed: 12/05/2022 Pg: 2 of 3

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and DIAZ and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Kariuki, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Snipes Johnson, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 21-2068 Doc: 34 Filed: 12/05/2022 Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:

George Kariuki seeks to appeal the district court’s orders granting Defendant’s

partial motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment and denying Kariuki’s

motions to seal and amend in this employment discrimination action. We dismiss the

appeals for lack of jurisdiction because the notices of appeal were not timely filed.

In civil cases, parties have 30 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). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a

jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell,

(2007).

The district court entered its order on August 25, 2021. Kariuki filed the notices of

appeal on September 27, 2021. Because Kariuki failed to file a timely notice of appeal or

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

3