Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez, dba Starlight Consulting Services v. Tigran Gumushyan, Darryl Onizuka, Doe Vazquez, United States, Commissioner of Social…

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.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.
TIGRAN GUMUSHYAN, DARRYL ONIZUKA, DOE
VAZQUEZ, UNITED STATES, COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendants-Appellees
______________________
2024-2076
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California in No. 3:16-cv-07236-LB,
Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler.
______________________
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
On April 24, 2015, Ricardo Jose Calderon Lopez filed a
complaint stemming from the Social Security Administra-
tion’s termination of his disability benefits. On May 16,
2017, the district court dismissed the complaint for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction and entered judgment. Mr. Cal-
deron Lopez appealed to the United States Court of Ap-
peals for the Ninth Circuit. On June 6, 2017, the district
Case: 24-2076 Document: 2 Page: 1 Filed: 07/31/2024

-- 1 of 2 --

CALDERON LOPEZ v. GUMUSHYAN 2
court granted Mr. Calderon Lopez leave to proceed in
forma pauperis on appeal. On December 28, 2018, the
Ninth Circuit affirmed. On June 11, 2024, Mr. Calderon
Lopez filed a notice of appeal directed to this court from a
decision entered “06/06/2017” in the district court action.1
“[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 60 days after entry of
final judgment when the case involves the United States,
its agencies, or its employees, 28 U.S.C. § 2107; Fed. R.
App. P. 4. Here, Mr. Calderon Lopez’s notice of appeal,
filed over seven years after the district court’s June 6, 2017
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 31, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
1 The district court transmitted a copy of the notice
of appeal to this court and the Ninth Circuit, which dock-
eted the notice as a new appeal. On July 2, 2024, the Ninth
Circuit dismissed the new appeal as duplicative of Mr. Cal-
deron Lopez’s prior appeal in this case.
Case: 24-2076 Document: 2 Page: 2 Filed: 07/31/2024

-- 2 of 2 --