UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1233
MARIE THERESE ASSA'AD-FALTAS,
Party-in-Interest – Appellant,
and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; NIKKI HALEY, in her official
capacity as the Governor of South Carolina,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 12-1243
MARIE THERESE ASSA'AD-FALTAS,
Party-in-Interest – Appellant,
and
LOW COUNTRY IMMIGRATION COALITION; MUJERES DE TRIUNFO;
NUEVOS CAMINOS; SOUTH CAROLINA VICTIM ASSISTANCE NETWORK;
SOUTH CAROLINA HISPANIC LEADERSHIP COUNCIL; SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION; SOUTHERN REGIONAL JOINT BOARD
OF WORKERS UNITED; JANE DOE, No. 1; Jane Doe, No. 2; JOHN
DOE, No. 1; YAJAIRA BENET-SMITH; KELLER BARRON; JOHN
MCKENZIE; SANDRA JONES
Plaintiffs,
and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Party-in-Interest,
v.
JAMES ALTON CANNON, in his official capacity as the Sheriff
of Charleston County; SCARLETT A. WILSON, in her official
capacity as Solicitor of the Ninth Judicial Circuit; ALAN
WILSON, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the
State of South Carolina; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; NIKKI
HALEY, in her official capacity as the Governor of South
Carolina,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (2:11-cv-02958-RMG; 2:11-cv-02779-RMG)
Submitted: August 22, 2012 Decided: August 24, 2012
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marie Therese Assa'ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se. Robert D. Cook,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia,
South Carolina, James Emory Smith, Jr., Assistant Attorney
General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Marie Therese Assa’ad-
Faltas seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying her
motions to intervene in two district court actions, and its
order denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We dismiss the
appeals for lack of jurisdiction because Assa’ad-Faltas did not
timely appeal.
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). When the United States or its
officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed
no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s
final judgment or order. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). Although
the district court may extend the appeal period under Fed. R.
App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopen the appeal period under Fed. R. App.
P. 4(a)(6), “the 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 orders were entered on the docket
on November 7, 2011, November 10, 2011, and December 14, 2011,
respectively. The notice of appeal was filed on February 17,
2012. Because Assa’ad-Faltas failed to file timely notices of
appeal or obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal
periods, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss
3
the appeals. We also deny as moot Assa’ad-Faltas’s motions to
file a surreply brief and to place the appeals in abeyance
pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. United
States, 132 S. Ct. 2492 (2012).
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
4