Aspero v. McDonald's Corp. , 100 F. App'x 135 ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1029
NELL SANDERS ASPERO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MCDONALD’S CORPORATION, a Delaware
Corporation,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (CA-03-27-MC)
Submitted: April 9, 2004 Decided: June 2, 2004
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Nell Sanders Aspero, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Nell Sanders Aspero appeals from district court orders
entered August 5, 2003, August 26, 2003, and November 25, 2003.
Aspero also moves for the entry of default judgment against
McDonald’s Corporation, to strike McDonald’s pleadings, and to
recertify the record to the district court.
As to Aspero’s appeal from the district court orders
entered August 5, 2003, and August 26, 2003, we dismiss the appeal
as untimely. The August 5, 2003 order denied Aspero’s request and
motion for a hearing to transfer her civil action from the United
States District Court for the District of Colorado to the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The
August 26, 2003 order denied Aspero’s motion for reconsideration.
Civil litigants are accorded thirty days after the district court’s
entry of a final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App.
P. 4(a)(1), unless the district court extends the appeal period,
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period. Fed. R.
App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and
jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434
U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S.
220, 229 (1960)). Aspero’s notice of appeal was filed on December
18, 2003, and is therefore untimely as to the district court’s
orders of August 5, 2003, and August 26, 2003. Because Aspero
failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension
- 2 -
or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss her appeal as to the
orders of August 5, 2003, and August 26, 2003.*
As to Aspero’s appeal from the district court order
entered November 25, 2003, denying her request for international
judicial assistance, we have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See Aspero v. McDonald’s Corp., No. CA-03-27-
MC (E.D. Va. filed Nov. 24, 2003; entered Nov. 25, 2003).
As to Aspero’s motions for the entry of default judgment
against McDonald’s, to strike McDonald’s pleadings, and to
recertify the record to the district court, we deny relief on these
motions. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED IN PART;
AFFIRMED IN PART
*
Even if Aspero’s notice of appeal was timely, it is
abundantly clear that the district court did not err. As found by
the district court, only the district court in which a case is
pending possesses authority to direct that the litigation be
transferred to another jurisdiction. Thus, Aspero’s request that
her case pending in the District of Colorado be transferred to the
Eastern District of Virginia can only be entertained by the United
States District Court for the District of Colorado.
- 3 -