Ta’kuan Bingham v. A. DAVID ROBINSON, Chief of Corrections Operations

25-6732Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit31 de dez. de 2025

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6732
TA’KUAN BINGHAM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
A. DAVID ROBINSON, Chief of Corrections Operations, et al.,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, Senior District Judge. (7:25-cv-00310-MFU-CKM)
Submitted: December 23, 2025 Decided: December 31, 2025
Before WILKINSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ta’Kuan Bingham, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Ta’Kuan Bingham seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 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 July 9, 2025, and the appeal period expired on
August 8, 2025. Bingham filed the notice of appeal on August 15, 2025.∗ Because
Bingham 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
∗ This is the date that the prison mailroom received Bingham’s notice of appeal. See
Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.