Bilal A. Al-Haqq v. Kenneth L. James, Prea

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-7084
BILAL A. AL-HAQQ,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
KENNETH L. JAMES, PREA; EYVONNE WILLINGHAM, Warden; JOSEPH
CANNING, Associate Warden; ELAINE FREEMAN, Associate Warden;
CORPORAL LAPOINT, Officer at Trenton Correctional Institution; MARK
COURTNEY, Lieutenant; JAMES WILLIAMS, Lieutenant; KAREN MEALER,
Mail Room Supervisor; JOSHUA MCKIE, Administrative Captain; THOMAS
BYRNE, Doctor; ANN SHEPPARD, Associate Warden; BRIAN KENDELL,
Warden,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Charleston. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (2:21-cv-01721-DCC)
Submitted: January 30, 2024 Decided: February 6, 2024
Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bilal A. Al-Haqq, Appellant Pro Se. Norma Anne Turner Jett, NESS & JETT, LLC,
Bamberg, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Bilal A. Al-Haqq seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendants in
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil action. Appellees move to dismiss the appeal. 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 22, 2022. Al-Haqq filed the notice
of appeal on October 13, 2023.* Because Al-Haqq failed to file a timely notice of appeal
or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant Appellees’ motion
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
* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of
appeal is the earliest date Al-Haqq 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 --