Christopher L. Nealey v. DR. DAVID E. WHITE; RN SCOTT, Medical Supervisor; RN STORM; LPN MAYO

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 26-6093
CHRISTOPHER L. NEALEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DR. DAVID E. WHITE; RN SCOTT, Medical Supervisor; RN STORM; LPN
MAYO,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:23-ct-03215-M-RJ)
Submitted: May 21, 2026 Decided: May 27, 2026
Before AGEE and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher L. Nealey, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Dotson Maldonado, BATTEN
MCLAMB SMITH, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina; Tanner J. Ray, Assistant Attorney
General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Christopher L. Nealey seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary
judgment to Defendants in Nealey’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Defendants have moved to
dismiss the appeal as untimely. Nealey moves for appointment of counsel and production
of records to assist him in responding to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. We deny Nealey’s
pending motions, grant the motion to dismiss, and 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 September 30, 2025, and the appeal period
expired on October 30, 2025. Nealey filed the notice of appeal, at the earliest, on January
9, 2026. Thus, Nealey failed to file a timely notice of appeal. Moreover, Nealey did not
obtain or request an extension or reopening of the appeal period. Although Nealey claims
in his filings on appeal that he underwent shoulder surgery in September 2025 that
prevented him from timely appealing the district court’s order, he did not request an
extension of the appeal period within the applicable limitations period, see Fed. R. App. P.
4(a)(5)(A), or otherwise claim that he did not receive timely notice of the district court’s
order thus warranting a reopening of the appeal period, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).

-- 2 of 3 --

3
Accordingly, we deny Nealey’s pending motions, including his motion for
appointment of counsel and production of records. Because Nealey failed to file a timely
notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant
Defendants’ motion to dismiss and 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

-- 3 of 3 --