WILLIAMS v. HIGHTOWER (2020)

SUMMARY ORDER

Charles C. Williams, pro se, appeals either from the September 7, 2018 entry of judgment by the district court (Thompson, J.) for Defendants-Appellees in Williams’ action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for false arrest, malicious prosecution, retaliation, and various state law claims, or from the May 2019 mandate of this Court dismissing Williams’ earlier appeals in this case. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

To the extent that Williams appeals from the September 7, 2018 judgment, this appeal is untimely. See 28 U.S.C. § 2107 (imposing 30-day deadline); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1) (same); see also Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(1) (extending deadlines when the last day is a weekend or holiday). The timely filing of a notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007). Further, this Court has already considered Williams’ appeal of that judgment, as well as from the district court’s denial of Williams’ motion to amend the judgment, and dismissed both as frivolous. Lastly, to the extent that Williams appeals from one of this Court’s mandates dismissing his appeals, he erroneously filed notices of appeal in the district court. To appeal the mandate of this Court, Williams should have filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court.

We have considered all of Williams’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.