George Kariuki v. North Carolina Department of Insurance, No. 21-2068 (4th Cir. 2022)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-2068 GEORGE KARIUKI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, Defendant - Appellee. No. 21-2069 GEORGE KARIUKI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-cv-00341-D) Submitted: November 9, 2022 Decided: December 5, 2022 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and DIAZ and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Kariuki, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Snipes Johnson, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: George Kariuki seeks to appeal the district court’s orders granting Defendant’s partial motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment and denying Kariuki’s motions to seal and amend in this employment discrimination action. We dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction because the notices of appeal were not timely filed. In civil cases, parties have 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 entered its order on August 25, 2021. Kariuki filed the notices of appeal on September 27, 2021. Because Kariuki failed to file a timely notice of appeal or 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 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.