Edward Plotzker v. Royce Lamberth, No. 09-2211 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-2211 EDWARD D. PLOTZKER, M.D., Plaintiff Appellant, v. ROYCE C. LAMBERTH, Chief United States District Court Judge for the District of Columbia; AMERICAN BOARD OF UROLOGY, Incorporated; KIRKLAND & ELLIS, LLP; GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, d/b/a George Washington University Medical Center; KILPATRICK STOCKTON, LLP; JOHN AND JANE DOES, Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (3:08-cv-00027-nkm-bwc) Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 24, 2010 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward D. Plotzker, Appellant Pro Se. Sara Bugbee Winn, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, James Worth Draughn, Jr., KIRKLAND & ELLIS, LLP, Washington, D.C., K. Lorraine Lord, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, Melissa Wolf Riley, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Charlottesville, Virginia, Adam Howard Charnes, KILPATRICK STOCKTON, LLP, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Edward D. Plotzker, M.D., seeks to appeal the district court s order granting Defendants various claims against them. motions to dismiss his 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 case [T]he is a Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court s order was entered on the docket on October 22, 2008. 20, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on October Because Plotzker 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 3
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.
