Charles Dread v. Maryland State Police ( 2022 )


Menu:
  • USCA4 Appeal: 22-1453      Doc: 9        Filed: 08/25/2022     Pg: 1 of 2
    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 22-1453
    CHARLES ANTHONY DREAD,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    MARYLAND STATE POLICE,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
    George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:20-cv-00592-GLR)
    Submitted: August 23, 2022                                        Decided: August 25, 2022
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, HEYTENS, Circuit Judge, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit
    Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Charles A. Dread, Appellant, Pro Se. Mark Holdsworth Bowen, Assistant Attorney
    General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Pikesville,
    Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    USCA4 Appeal: 22-1453         Doc: 9      Filed: 08/25/2022    Pg: 2 of 2
    PER CURIAM:
    Charles Anthony Dread seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing Dread’s
    complaint, alleging multiple claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42
    U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the
    notice of appeal was 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, 
    551 U.S. 205
    , 214 (2007).
    The district court entered its order on November 24, 2020. Dread filed the notice
    of appeal on April 26, 2022. Because this notice of appeal is not timely filed, and Dread
    did not seek 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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-1453

Filed Date: 8/25/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/26/2022