United States v. Beverly Beard , 528 F. App'x 370 ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6175
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BEVERLY J. BEARD,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge.
(1:08-cr-00141-CCB-1; 1:11-cv-00285-CCB)
Submitted: June 11, 2013 Decided: June 14, 2013
Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Beverly J. Beard, Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen O’Connell Gavin,
Allen F. Loucks, Sujit Raman, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Beverly J. Beard seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on her 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013)
motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because
the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a
party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty
days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or
order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 November 20, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on
February 5, 2013. Because Beard failed to file a timely notice
of appeal or to obtain 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