Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

358 F. App'x 416

Static Control Components, Inc. v. Ahmadi

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided December 23, 2009

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2009-12-23

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2010

Relies on Browder v. Director Department of Corrections of Illinois · United States v. Robinson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2009-12-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

¶2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

¶3 Reza H. Ahmadi and his corporation Intelligent Office Products, Inc. seek to appeal the district court’s final order entering a default judgment against them. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

¶4 Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judg *417 ment 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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

¶5 The district court’s order was entered on the docket on December 4, 2008. The notice of appeal was filed on January 6, 2009. Because Appellants 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 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

¶6 DISMISSED.

/358/fappx/416 · .json · Public domain