Ky Tan Le v. Social Security Administration

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1685
KY TAN LE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
U.S. CONGRESS; BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States
of America,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen,
Senior District Judge. (3:09-cv-00137-GCM-DCK)
Submitted: August 16, 2012 Decided: August 20, 2012
Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ky Tan Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Lucy Albright Bezdek, SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Boston, Massachusetts, for Appellee.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Ky Tan Le seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, granting summary
judgment for the Commissioner of Social Security, and affirming
the administrative law judge’s decision that Le is subject to a
five-month waiting period before receiving disability insurance
benefits. He also seeks to appeal the court’s order denying as
moot his motion for a court order. 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 orders were entered on the docket
on March 18 and April 5, 2011. The notice of appeal was filed
on May 18, 2012. Because Le 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

-- 3 of 4 --

4
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 --