Rodney Williams, Jr. v. State of North Carolina, No. 15-7058 (4th Cir. 2015)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7058 RODNEY MCDONALD WILLIAMS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:14-ct-03267-D) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 20, 2015 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney McDonald Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rodney McDonald Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded 30 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 judgment was entered on the docket on May 4, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on June 30, 2015. * Because Williams failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension dismiss the appeal. facts and legal or reopening of the appeal period, we We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are * adequately presented in the For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988). 2 materials before this 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.