UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1390
CARLA T. LEWIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHELLE DAVIS, Insurance Agent/CISR Elite; RIVERLAND INSURERS,
Insurance Company; CROXTON, ELLIOTT AND DAINGERFIELD, INC., trading
as Riverland Insurers; ROY SMITH, AIC-VPIA; VIRGINIA PROPERTY
INSURANCE ASSOCIATION INC.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. David J. Novak, District Judge. (3:20-cv-00591-DJN)
Submitted: June 29, 2021 Decided: July 1, 2021
Before HARRIS, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Carla T. Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. Tracy Taylor Hague, Richmond, Virginia, Michael
David Pierce, VANDEVENTER BLACK, LLP, Norfolk, Virginia; Gary Robert Reinhardt,
KALBAUGH, PFUND & MESSERSMITH, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Carla T. Lewis seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting Defendants’
motions to dismiss Lewis’ complaint alleging Defendants failed to properly address water
damage and mold in Lewis’ home. 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 February 2, 2021. Lewis filed the notice of
appeal on March 22, 2021. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(d) (providing notice of appeal mistakenly
filed in court of appeals is considered filed in district court on date so noted). Because
Lewis failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the
appeal period, we grant Appellees’ motions to 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