Robert Thomas Payne v. MICHELLE K. LEE, Deputy Under Secretary for Intellectual Property

15-2203Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit4 mai 2016

Texte intégral

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2203
ROBERT THOMAS PAYNE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
MICHELLE K. LEE, Deputy Under Secretary for Intellectual
Property and Deputy Director, United States Patent and
Trademark Office,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:14-cv-01077-TSE-MSN)
Submitted: April 29, 2016 Decided: May 4, 2016
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Thomas Payne, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Robert Thomas Payne seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing his discrimination action without prejudice.
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 60 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
August 3, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on October 6,
2015. Because Payne 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 of 2 --

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.