Damorius D. Gaines, a/k/a Damorius Dontavis Gaines, a/k/a Damorius Dontavious Gaines v. Geoffrey Benedict Eaton

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-7247
DAMORIUS D. GAINES, a/k/a Damorius Dontavis Gaines, a/k/a Damorius
Dontavious Gaines,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
GEOFFREY BENEDICT EATON; CATHERINE T. HUEY; CORDELL J.
MADDOX; ALAN MCCRORY WILSON; WILLIAM M. BLITCH, JR.; STAN
OVERBY; CRAIG A. GARDNER; LILLIAN L. MEADOWS; LETITIA VERDIN;
BEN APLIN; CHAD MCBRIDE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Anderson. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (8:22-cv-00416-HMH)
Submitted: February 21, 2023 Decided: February 24, 2023
Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Damorius D. Gaines, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Damorius D. Gaines seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to dismiss his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint.
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 August 11, 2022. Gaines filed the notice of
appeal on October 11, 2022.* Because Gaines 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 purposes of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing in the notice of
appeal is the earliest date Gaines 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 --