Opinion

Pamela Bond v. Maryland Board of Nursing

  • 590 F. App'x 253
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Jan 26, 2015
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Shedd, Keenan, Diaz
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 33.9%

The opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1957

PAMELA BOND,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MARYLAND BOARD OF NURSING; FUTURE CARE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District

Judge. (1:14-cv-00872-WMN)

Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 26, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Pamela Sue Bond, Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Bruno DeFranco,

Douglas F. Gansler, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,

Baltimore, Maryland; Charles R. Bacharach, GORDON FEINBLATT LLC,

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Pamela Bond seeks to appeal the district court’s order

granting Defendants’ motions to dismiss Bond’s civil suit. We

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice

of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded thirty 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 order was entered on the docket

on July 24, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on

September 11, 2014. Because Bond failed to file a timely notice

of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal

period, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss

the appeal. We deny Bond’s motion to admit evidence. 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

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.