Banks v. Virginia Intl Terminals, No. 06-1956 (4th Cir. 2007)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1956 WILLIAM NICHOLAS BANKS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VIRGINIA INTERNATIONAL TERMINALS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:06-cv-00138-RBS) Submitted: March 30, 2007 Decided: April 19, 2007 Before MICHAEL, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Nicholas Banks, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Morgan Ryan, VANDERVENTER & BLACK, LLP, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William Nicholas Banks, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court s orders dismissing his complaint and imposing a prefiling injunction. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty 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). and jurisdictional. This appeal period is mandatory Browder v. Dir., Dep t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court s final order was entered on the docket on June 29, 2006. 29, 2006. The notice of appeal was filed on August Because Banks failed to file a timely notice of appeal or obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Banks motion for appointment of appellate counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED - 2 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.