Armagene Ellis-Smith v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-2281
ARMAGENE ELLIS-SMITH,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Party-in-Interest.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:08-cv-00604-TDS-WWD)
Submitted: June 27, 2011 Decided: July 15, 2011
Before KING, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Armagene Ellis-Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Gill Paul Beck,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina;
Nancy B. Salafia, Regional Counsel, Boston, Massachusetts, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Armagene Ellis-Smith seeks to appeal the district
court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate
judge and upholding the denial of Ellis-Smith’s application for
disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income.
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 September 14, 2010. The notice of appeal was filed on
November 16, 2010. Because Ellis-Smith 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

-- 2 of 3 --

3
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 3 of 3 --