Shakeemah Aryanah Richardson v. United States

N OTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
SHAKEEMAH ARYANAH RICHARDSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee
______________________
2024-1553
______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims
in No. 1:23-cv-01365-ZNS, Judge Zachary N. Somers.
______________________
Decided: November 7, 2025
______________________
SHAKEEMAH A RYANAH RICHARDSON, Stone Mountain,
GA, pro se.
I OANA C. M EYER , Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil
Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing-
ton, DC, for defendant-appellee. Also represented by
BRIAN M. BOYNTON, P ATRICIA M. M CCARTHY , L OREN MISHA
P REHEIM .
______________________
Before H UGHES , C UNNINGHAM , and STARK, Circuit Judges.
Case: 24-1553 Document: 27 Page: 1 Filed: 11/07/2025

-- 1 of 3 --

RICHARDSON v. US 2
P ER CURIAM .
Shakeemah Aryanah Richardson filed suit in the
United States Court of Federal Claims seeking damages
for, among other claims, an alleged breach of contract.
S’Appx 1.1 The Court of Federal Claims dismissed her suit
for lack of jurisdiction. S’Appx 4. Because Ms. Richard-
son’s Notice of Appeal was untimely filed, we lack jurisdic-
tion and dismiss.
I
The Court of Federal Claims issued an order and opin-
ion in Ms. Richardson’s case on December 19, 2023. S’Appx
1. It entered judgment against her on December 20, 2023.
S’Appx 5.
To be timely, a non-governmental party seeking to ap-
peal an adverse judgment from the Court of Federal Claims
must file a notice of appeal within 60 days after that court
enters judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 2522 (“Review of a deci-
sion of the United States Court of Federal Claims shall be
obtained by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk of the
Court of Federal Claims within the time and in the manner
prescribed for appeals to United States courts of ap-
peals from the United States district courts.”); 28 U.S.C.
§ 2107(b) (providing that time for filing notice of appeal in
any district court action in which United States is a party
is 60 days from entry of judgment); Fed. R. App.
P. 4(a)(1)(B) (“The notice of appeal may be filed by any
party within 60 days after entry of the judgment or order
appealed from if one of the parties is: . . . the United
States.”).
Ms. Richardson’s notice of appeal, then, needed to be
filed no later than Tuesday, February 20, 2024. See Fed.
1 “S’Appx” refers to the Supplemental Appendix accom-
panying the government’s Informal Brief, ECF No. 17.
Case: 24-1553 Document: 27 Page: 2 Filed: 11/07/2025

-- 2 of 3 --

RICHARDSON v. US 3
R. App. P. 26(a)(1)(C) (“[I]f the last day is a Saturday, Sun-
day, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the
end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal
holiday.”). She did not, however, put her notice in the mail
until March 1, and it was received and filed by the court on
March 5, 2024. ECF No. 1. It was, therefore, untimely.
“[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). “An untimely appeal must be dis-
missed for lack of jurisdiction; the requirement cannot be
waived, and it is not subject to equitable tolling.” Maran-
dola v. United States, 518 F.3d 913, 914 (Fed. Cir. 2008)
(citing Bowles, 551 U.S. at 214). Thus, we lack jurisdiction
here and must dismiss Ms. Richardson’s appeal.
II
We have considered Ms. Richardson’s remaining argu-
ments and find they do not grant us appellate jurisdiction.2
Accordingly, her appeal is dismissed.
DISMISSED
COSTS
Each party to bear its own costs.
2 Following completion of the merits briefing, Ms. Rich-
ardson filed a motion to dismiss, acknowledging this court
lacks jurisdiction. ECF No. 25. In that motion, she addi-
tionally requests that we transfer her case to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
Id. at 2. But because that court is not “one in which the
action could have been brought at the time the claim was
filed,” and because her appeal is untimely, we are unable
to grant this relief. Rodriguez v. United States, 862 F.2d
1558, 1559-60 (Fed. Cir. 1988); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2107(b).
Case: 24-1553 Document: 27 Page: 3 Filed: 11/07/2025

-- 3 of 3 --