USCA4 Appeal: 23-1727 Doc: 15 Filed: 02/01/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1727

OLIVER RICARDO COLEMAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF EDUCATION PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah Lynn Boardman, District Judge. (8:21-cv-00068-DLB)

Submitted: January 11, 2024 Decided: February 1, 2024

Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Oliver R. Coleman, Appellant Pro Se. Edmund J. O’Meally, PESSIN KATZ LAW, P.A., Towson, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1727 Doc: 15 Filed: 02/01/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Oliver Ricardo Coleman appeals the district court’s order granting the Board of

Education of Prince George’s County’s (“Board”) motion to dismiss his complaint alleging

violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act,

, 12133;

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act,

(a); and the Individuals with

Disabilities Act,

to 1482. The Board has moved to dismiss the appeal

as untimely. In a civil case, parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district

court’s final judgment to note an appeal. See Fed. R. App. 4(a)(1)(A). A judgment is

entered for purposes of Rule 4(a) when it is entered in the civil docket and set forth on a

separate document, or 150 days have run from entry of the judgment in the civil docket.

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(7)(A)(ii); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a). Here, the district court’s order

was entered on the civil docket on June 2, 2023, but it was not accompanied by a separate

document. Therefore, Coleman had 150 days to note an appeal. Coleman’s notice of

appeal, filed on July 10, 2023, was not untimely.

Turning to the merits of the appeal, we have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the Board’s motion to dismiss the appeal as

untimely and affirm the district court’s order. 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.

AFFIRMED

2