Harry Nie v. Judge Rebecca Beach Smith

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6097
HARRY NIE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JUDGE REBECCA BEACH SMITH; JUDGE RAYMOND A. JACKSON; JUDGE
DOUGLAS E. MILLER; JUDGE PAUL V. NIEMEYER; JUDGE HENRY F.
FLOYD; JUDGE JULIUS N. RICHARDSON; CHADWICK DOTSON, Director of
the Virginia Department of Corrections,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:21-cv-00599-AWA-RJK)
Submitted: October 16, 2025 Decided: November 18, 2025
Before QUATTLEBAUM, HEYTENS, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Harry Nie, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Harry Nie seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation
of the magistrate judge and dismissing Nie’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. 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 July 31, 2023, and the appeal period expired
on August 30, 2023. Nie filed the notice of appeal on January 30, 2025.* Because Nie
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
* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
appeal is the earliest date Nie could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing
to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

-- 2 of 2 --