Panwala v. Southeastern Regional Medical Center

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-2449 NAITIK D. PANWALA, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOUTHEASTERN REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-01-189) Submitted: April 24, 2003 Decided: May 1, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Naitik D. Panwala, Appellant Pro Se. James Bernard Spears, Jr., Jerry Howard Walters, Jr., HAYNSWORTH, BALDWIN, JOHNSON & GREAVES, L.L.C., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Naitik D. Panwala seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting his former employer, Southeastern Regional Medical Center, summary judgment in his civil action. 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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on November 8, 2002. The notice of appeal was filed on December 11, 2002. Because Panwala 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 2