Michael Grafman, Petitioner-appellant, v. U.S. Parole Commission, Respondent-appellee, 70 F.3d 119 (9th Cir. 1995)
Annotate this CaseBefore: GOODWIN, PREGERSON, and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Federal prisoner Michael Grafman appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, challenging the revocation of his parole, based on the finding of the United States Parole Commission that Grafman violated the terms of his parole by engaging in conduct involving sexual assault. Grafman acknowledges that he failed to file a timely notice of appeal with this court. Moreover, his motion for an extension of time was filed with the district court more than thirty days after the prescribed time to file a notice of appeal and thus was untimely. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (5). "Where an appellant fails to file a [timely] notice of appeal ... and likewise fails effectively to move for an extension of time within the 30-day grace period set forth in rule 4(a) (5), this court must dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.... The procedures set forth in rule 4 are strictly construed." Malone v. Avenenti, 850 F.2d 569, 572 (9th Cir. 1988). Accordingly, Grafman's appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.1
DISMISSED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Grafman's request for a limited remand to the district court or a suspension of the time limits of Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 is denied
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.
