Opinion
No. 19-6906 No. 19-6908 No. 19-6922
09-04-2019
David Meyers, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, Chief District Judge. (7:18-cv-00598-MFU-RSB; 7:19-cv-00003-MFU-PMS; 7:19-cv-00002-MFU-RSB) Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Meyers, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, David Meyers, a Virginia inmate and three-striker, has filed a consolidated notice of appeal, but failed to designate the orders he seeks to appeal. We dismiss these appeals for lack of jurisdiction.
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B), a notice of appeal must specify the judgment or order being appealed. We construe this rule liberally, "asking whether, the putative appellant has manifested the intent to appeal a specific judgment or order and whether the affected party had notice and an opportunity fully to brief the issue." Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 176 (4th Cir. 2014). "This principle of liberal construction does not, however, excuse noncompliance" with Rule 3. Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248 (1992). Because the dictates of Rule 3 are jurisdictional, each requirement must be satisfied as a prerequisite to appellate review. Id. In his one-page consolidated notice of appeal, Meyers fails to designate the orders being appealed. Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction.
Because Meyers failed to designate the orders being appealed, we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction. We also deny as moot Meyers' motions for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of fees under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. 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