UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2546
CHUKWUMA E. AZUBUKO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
RYA W. ZOBEL, Judge, Individual and Official Capacities; LEO
T. SOROKIN, Magistrate Judge, in Official Capacity; TWO
UNKNOWN UNITED STATES’ MARSHALS, in Official Capacity; JOEL
STEMBRIDGE, in Individual and Official Capacities; JOEL E.
PISANO, Judge, in Individual and Official Capacities; MARCIA
M. WALDRON, Third Circuit Clerk, in I/O Capacities,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District
Judge. (1:12-cv-00871-LO-TCB)
Submitted: March 28, 2013 Decided: April 1, 2013
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chukwuma E. Azubuko, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Chukwuma E. Azubuko seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying his motion for relief from the judgment
dismissing his complaint for lack of jurisdiction. We dismiss
the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal
was not timely filed.
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), 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 August 23, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on December
10, 2012. Because Azubuko 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 this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2