In Re: Deepwater Horizon, No. 16-30918 (5th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 16-30918 Document: 00514584401 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/03/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 16-30918 Summary Calendar FILED August 3, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk IN RE: DEEPWATER HORIZON _________________________ LAKE EUGENIE LAND & DEVELOPMENT, INCORPORATED; ET AL, Plaintiffs v. BP EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION, INCORPORATED; BP AMERICA PRODUCTION COMPANY; BP, P.L.C., Defendants - Appellees v. DAVID ANDREW CHRISTENSON, Movant – Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:10-MD-2179 USDC No. 2:12-CV-970 Case: 16-30918 Document: 00514584401 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/03/2018 No. 16-30918 Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * David Andrew Christenson appeals the district court’s denial of review of the post-reconsideration incompleteness notice sent to him by the Court Supervised Settlement Program authorized to administer the Deepwater Horizon Economic and Property Damages Settlement. Also pending is a motion for reconsideration of the clerk’s order denying Christenson’s motion for leave to file a third supplemental memorandum. This court must always be mindful of its jurisdiction and may consider the issue sua sponte. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). In a civil case, a timely notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The notice of appeal in a civil action must be filed within 30 days of entry of the judgment or order from which the appeal is taken. FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(1)(A). The district court’s judgment denying Christenson’s request for review was entered on the docket on July 7, 2016. The notice of appeal was filed on August 11, 2016, after the 30-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal. Thus, the notice of appeal was untimely, and this court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal of the district court’s denial of review. See Bowles, 551 U.S. at 214. This appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See id. All pending motions are DENIED as moot. Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * 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.
