UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1056
DAVID R. CORBIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
TALMADGE BAGGETT; SHERIFF ENNIS WRIGHT; CHRIS BULLAED;
FRANCES M. MCDUFFIE; LISA SCALES; WINNIE OWENS; CARL BRITT;
DEBRA JOHNSON; PAMELA FARKAS; PAJO, INC.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:19-cv-00645-CCE-LPA)
Submitted: June 16, 2020 Decided: June 18, 2020
Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David R. Corbin, Appellant Pro Se. Ronnie Monroe Mitchell, CUMBERLAND COUNTY
SHERIFF’S OFFICE, Fayetteville, North Carolina; Kathryn Hicks Shields, Assistant
Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North
Carolina; Kimberly Marie Marston, BROOKS PIERCE, LLP, Greensboro, North Carolina;
Robert Alford Hasty, Jr., Assistant County Attorney, CUMBERLAND COUNTY
ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Fayetteville, North Carolina; James Scott Flowers, HUTCHENS
LAW FIRM, Fayetteville, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
David R. Corbin seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his civil action.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was 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 October 8, 2019. Corbin filed the notice of
appeal on January 9, 2020. Because Corbin failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to
obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We further
deny Corbin leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
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