USCA4 Appeal: 23-6445 Doc: 16 Filed: 10/11/2023 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6445

ANTHONY FRED MARTIN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SUSAN DUFFY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge. (4:15-cv-04947-DCN)

Submitted: September 6, 2023 Decided: October 11, 2023

Before GREGORY, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Fred Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Lindemann, LINDEMANN LAW FIRM, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6445 Doc: 16 Filed: 10/11/2023 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Anthony Fred Martin, a South Carolina prisoner, filed a civil action against

Defendant Susan Duffy pursuant to

. A jury ultimately found in Duffy’s

favor, and the district court entered judgment in accordance with the jury’s verdict. On

March 22, 2023, the district court denied Martin’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or

amend the judgment. Martin now seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his

Rule 59(e) motion. Duffy has moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely, which Martin

opposes.

The district court entered its order on March 22, 2023. 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); see Parrish v. United States,

, 162 (4th Cir. 2023).

Because Martin is incarcerated, the notice of appeal is considered filed as of the date it was

properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1);

Houston v. Lack,

(1988).

The record does not conclusively establish whether Martin provided his notice of

appeal to prison officials for mailing on or before April 21, 2023. Accordingly, we defer

ruling on Duffy’s motion to dismiss at this juncture, and we remand the case for the limited

purpose of allowing the district court to make this finding and to determine whether Martin

2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-6445 Doc: 16 Filed: 10/11/2023 Pg: 3 of 3

timely noted an appeal under Rule 4(c)(1) and Houston. The record, as supplemented, will

then be returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED

3