Zhongan Wang v. CCRM Fertility of Northern Virginia

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1014 Doc: 28 Filed: 04/15/2025 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-1014 ZHONGAN WANG, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CCRM FERTILITY OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA, a Corporation, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Michael Stefan Nachmanoff, District Judge. (1:24-cv-00539-MSN-WEF) Submitted: April 10, 2025 Decided: April 15, 2025 Before WILKINSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Zhongan Wang, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Ballard Vieth, GOODMAN ALLEN DONNELLY, PLLC, Glen Allen, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1014 Doc: 28 Filed: 04/15/2025 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Zhongan Wang seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting Defendant’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss and dismissing without prejudice his pro se complaint and the court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 motion. Defendant moves to dismiss the appeal as untimely, and Wang has responded. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. In civil cases, parties have 30 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). When, however, a party files a motion under Rule 59, “the time to file an appeal runs . . . from the entry of the order disposing of [that] motion.” Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(iv). “[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 denied Wang’s Rule 59 motion on November 15, 2024. Wang therefore had until December 16, 2024, to file his notice of appeal. 1 Wang, however, filed his notice of appeal on December 30, 2024—14 days after the appeal period expired. 2 Because Wang failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny his motions to strike Defendant’s motion to dismiss, to 1 Because the 30th day fell on Sunday, December 15, Wang had until the next business day to file the notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(1). 2 Although Wang asserts that the district court rejected a prior filing for failure to provide a correct fee, the district court docket sheet belies his claim. 2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1014 Doc: 28 Filed: 04/15/2025 Pg: 3 of 3 impose sanctions, and to disqualify Defendant’s counsel, and we grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss the appeal and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3