Benjamin Roberts v. Inova Healthcare System

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1460
BENJAMIN ROBERTS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
INOVA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM; STEPHEN JONES, Doctor/CEO of Fairfax
Hospital; INOVA HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Michael Stefan Nachmanoff, District Judge. (1:22-cv-00337-MSN-IDD)
Submitted: May 30, 2024 Decided: June 3, 2024
Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Benjamin Roberts, Appellant Pro Se. Laurie Kirkland, BLANKINGSHIP & KEITH, PC,
Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Benjamin Roberts appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint
asserting claims for wrongful termination, breach of contract, and violation of the
Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the National Research Act of 1974,
related to Roberts’ termination from his employment. Appellees have moved to dismiss
the appeal as untimely. 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 March 22, 2023. Roberts did not file his notice
of appeal until April 25, 2023, 34 days after entry of the court’s order. However, the district
court did not enter its judgment on a separate document, as required by Fed. R. Civ.
P. 58(a). Therefore, the judgment is not deemed entered until 150 days after entry of the
order, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(c)(2), and Roberts’ notice of appeal was therefore timely. We
thus deny Appellees’ motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely.
With respect to the dismissal of Roberts’ claims, we have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Roberts v.
INOVA Healthcare Sys., No. 1:22-cv-00337-MSN-ADD (E.D. Va. Mar. 22, 2023). We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

-- 2 of 3 --

3
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid in the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --