Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez, dba Starlight Consulting Services v. David Abraham Silberman, Andrew Armando, San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office, San…

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
RICARDO JOSE CALDERON LOPEZ, dba Starlight
Consulting Services,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
DAVID ABRAHAM SILBERMAN, ANDREW
ARMANDO, SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF’S
OFFICE, SAN MATEO, CA,
Defendants-Appellees
______________________
2024-2000
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California in No. 3:18-cv-00747-MMC,
Judge Maxine M. Chesney.
______________________
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
On February 5, 2018, Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez
filed a complaint asserting, among other things, civil rights
claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 against local gov-
ernmental entities and employees. The district court’s Feb-
ruary 6, 2018 order denied Mr. Calderon Lopez leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, and after he failed to pay the
filing fee, the district court dismissed the case on March 14,
Case: 24-2000 Document: 2 Page: 1 Filed: 07/23/2024

-- 1 of 2 --

CALDERON LOPEZ v. SILBERMAN 2
2018. Mr. Calderon Lopez appealed to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which dismissed his
appeal as frivolous on July 16, 2018. On June 17, 2024,
Mr. Calderon Lopez filed a notice of appeal directed to this
court from a decision entered “02/06/2018” in the district
court action.
“[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), and, in order to be timely, a notice of ap-
peal must generally be filed within 30 days after entry of
final judgment, 28 U.S.C. § 2107; Fed. R. App. P. 4. Here,
Mr. Calderon Lopez’s notice of appeal, filed over six years
after the district court’s February 6, 2018 decision, is
clearly untimely. For at least this reason, we and any other
court of appeals lack jurisdiction.
Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
(2) Each party shall bear its own costs.
July 23, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 24-2000 Document: 2 Page: 2 Filed: 07/23/2024

-- 2 of 2 --