Hamer v. Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago

Whether the thirty-day limit for extending the deadline to file notices of appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5)(C) is a statutory mandate or a claim-processing rule open to equitable exceptions.

After Respondent was granted summary judgment on Petitioner's Title VII discrimination claim, Petitioner's counsel filed a motion to withdraw from the case and requested additional time for Petitioner to file her notice of appeal. The district court granted Petitioner's motion, and Petitioner filed a notice of appeal within the time provided by the district court's order, however; the district court's order allotted a longer time extension than the thirty days provided by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5)(C). This caused the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to hold that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal, because the district court did not have discretion to extend Petitioner's time to file her notice of appeal beyond the filing period of thirty days. Petitioner argues that the thirty-day limitation is not a statutory mandate. Instead, Petitioner contends that Rule 4(a)(5)(C) is a claim-processing rule that is open to equitable exceptions and does not implicate jurisdiction, because the thirty-day limit is not codified by a separate federal statute. Petitioner seeks review of her appeal on the merits.