Dwight Xavier Jones v. PATSY MCDANIEL, Lexington County Detention Center

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7685
DWIGHT XAVIER JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PATSY MCDANIEL, Lexington County Detention Center; MAJOR
QUIG, Lexington County Detention Center; CAPTAIN RONALD
O’NEILL, Lexington County Detention Center,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
MELODY JAMES, Cayce Magistrate Court Judge; PSO BRADACS;
CAYCE PUBLIC SAFETY,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg. R. Bryan Harwell, District
Judge. (5:11-cv-00754-RBH)
Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 16, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dwight Xavier Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel C. Plyler,
DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Dwight Xavier Jones, a South Carolina prisoner, seeks
to appeal the district court’s orders adopting the
recommendations of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil
action. Appellees Major Quig and Captain Ronald O’Neill and
Defendant PSO Bradacs move to dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction and for suspension of the deadline to file an
informal response brief. After review of the record and the
motion to dismiss, we dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty 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 judgment on August 15,
2012. The notice of appeal was filed on September 17, 2012.*
Because Jones failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to
* Jones admits in his informal brief that he delivered the
notice of appeal to prison officials for mailing to the court on
September 17, 2012. Accordingly, we treat this date as the
filing date for the notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c);
Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

-- 3 of 4 --

4
obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we
dismiss the appeal and deny as moot the motions to dismiss and
for suspension of the deadline to file an informal response
brief. We also deny as moot Jones’ motion to proceed with an
appeal to the Supreme Court. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 4 of 4 --