Naranjo
Naranjo v. Roe
85 F. App'x 598
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 12, 2004No. 02-56757; D.C. No. CV-02-00068-GLTCalifornia81 words
Lead Opinion
ORDER **
This appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because petitioner Joel Heredia Naranjo failed to file a timely notice of appeal and the district court found that Naranjo does not qualify for reopening of time under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). The mandate issued on January 2, 2004 is hereby withdrawn.
DISMISSED
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.