Corey Fountain, Sr., proceeding pro se, and Janay Fountain sued several defendants in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The district court dismissed their second amended complaints and subsequently denied their motions to reopen the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The district court entered its initial judgment on October 10, 2025, and issued the post-judgment order denying the Rule 60(b) motions on December 17, 2025. The Fountains filed their notice of appeal on January 20, 2026, challenging both the dismissal and the denial of the motion to reopen.
The court analyzed the jurisdictional timeline under 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a) and the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The court noted that the Fountains' Rule 60(b) motions tolled the time to appeal the judgment. Consequently, the thirty-day appeal window began on December 17, 2025, when the post-judgment order was entered, and expired on January 16, 2026. Because the Fountains filed their notice of appeal on January 20, 2026, the filing was untimely. The court cited Green v. Drug Enf't Admin. to confirm that an untimely notice of appeal cannot invoke appellate jurisdiction, regardless of the underlying merits of the case.
The appeal is dismissed without a decision on the merits of the underlying civil rights claims. The district court's dismissal of the complaints and denial of the motion to reopen stand. The Fountains have no further appellate remedy in the Eleventh Circuit for this specific judgment due to the jurisdictional bar. The decision reinforces the strict enforcement of appeal deadlines even when tolling motions are pending.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download