AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Plaintiff, a self-represented litigant and currently incarcerated, sought to appeal a district court's order that granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendant, GEO Group, Inc. The Plaintiff's appeal was based on the claim that he never received official notice of the court's ruling, among other arguments related to procedural challenges and access to resources for filing an appeal.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that exceptional circumstances, including not receiving any official notice of the court's ruling, should excuse his failure to timely file notice of appeal. Additionally, the Plaintiff claimed a lack of access to legal resources and knowledge of procedural rules as reasons for the delay in filing the appeal (paras 3-6).
• Defendants: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the Plaintiff's appeal should be dismissed due to the untimely filing of the notice of appeal.
• Whether the Plaintiff's claimed exceptional circumstances justify excusing the late filing of the notice of appeal.

Disposition

• The appeal was dismissed due to the untimely filing of the notice of appeal (para 7).

Reasons

• Zamora, J., with Vigil, Chief Judge, and Bustamante, Judge, concurring, determined that the timely filing of a notice of appeal is a mandatory precondition to the exercise of jurisdiction. The court found that the Plaintiff's notice of appeal was filed approximately two and a half months after the deadline, rendering it untimely. The court was not persuaded by the Plaintiff's arguments regarding exceptional circumstances, including the claim of not receiving official notice of the court's ruling and lack of access to legal resources. The court referenced previous rulings to support the decision that lack of notice and knowledge of procedural rules do not constitute exceptional circumstances that would excuse the late filing. Additionally, the court noted the Plaintiff's participation in a telephonic hearing and the instructions given by the district court to Defendant's counsel to prepare an order, indicating that the Plaintiff had sufficient notice of the decision to file an appeal in a timely manner. The court also highlighted inconsistencies in the Plaintiff's claims regarding access to resources for filing an appeal (paras 1-6).