Charles Whims, Jr. v. Ray Mabus, No. 12-1772 (4th Cir. 2012)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1772 CHARLES F. WHIMS, JR., Plaintiff Appellant, v. RAY MABUS, Sec. of the Navy, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, District Judge. (1:11-cv-01861-BEL) Submitted: November 20, 2012 Before TRAXLER, Judges. Chief Judge, Decided: November 26, 2012 and SHEDD and FLOYD, Circuit Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles F. Whims, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Neil R. White, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Charles F. Whims, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court s order dismissing his employment discrimination action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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). timely filing of a notice jurisdictional requirement. of appeal in a civil [T]he case is a Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court s order was entered on the docket on April 12, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on June 15, 2012. Because Whims failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the 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.