Christopher Jones v. Boyd Bennett, No. 11-6327 (4th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6327 CHRISTOPHER JONES, Plaintiff Appellant, v. BOYD BENNETT, Director of Prisons; KEITH WHITENER, Superintendent, Alexander Correctional Institution; FNU MADOXX, Captain; ANGELA SMIGIEL, RN, Medical Specialist, NCPLS; SARAH BLAIR, Attorney, NCPLS; FNU BAKER, PA, Alexander Correctional Institution, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:09-cv-00025-GCM) Submitted: June 16, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and Senior Circuit Judge. GREGORY, Decided: Circuit Judges, June 21, 2011 and HAMILTON, Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Christopher Jones seeks to appeal the district court s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (2006) complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. 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). [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 March 25, 2009. 13, 2011. The notice of appeal was filed on January Because Jones 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 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.