Anthony Wright v. Joanne Conley , 539 F. App'x 259 ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1800
ANTHONY LAMAR WRIGHT, a/k/a Anthony L. Wright,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JOANNE CONLEY, in her individual capacity; DEBRA BRABHAM, in
her individual capacity; WARDEN MACKIE, in his individual
capacity; DR. MOORE, in his individual capacity; CHUCK
FRAZIER, in his individual capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (4:10-cv-02444-TLW)
Submitted: September 16, 2013 Decided: September 20, 2013
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Lamar Wright, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew David Cavender,
GRIFFITH, SADLER & SHARP, PA, Beaufort, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Lamar Wright seeks to appeal the district
court’s margin order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion
for reconsideration of the court’s prior order adopting the
magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2006) civil rights action for failure to exhaust his
administrative remedies. 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). “[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’s order was entered on the docket
on May 22, 2013. Accordingly, the latest day for filing a
timely notice of appeal was Friday, June 21, 2013. See Fed. R.
App. P. 26(a)(1). Wright’s notice of appeal, however, was not
received for filing until Monday, June 24, 2013. Because Wright
failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an
extension or reopening of the appeal period, we are constrained
to dismiss the appeal as untimely. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3