Symbionics Inc. v. Ortlieb
432 F. App'x 216
4th Cir.2011Background
- Symbionics filed an untimely notice of appeal from a district court judgment in their dispute with Ortlieb.
- The district court granted Symbionics an extension under Rule 4(a)(5) for excusable neglect due to a computer calendar error by counsel.
- Ortlieb cross-appealed the district court’s excusable neglect determination.
- The appeal questioned whether the district court abused its discretion in granting the extension under Pioneer factors.
- The Fourth Circuit held the district court abused its discretion and reversed, dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and remanded for attorney’s fees if applicable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the district court abuse its discretion granting an extension for excusable neglect? | Symbionics | Ortlieb | Yes; district court abused discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership, 507 U.S. 380 (1993) (establishes four-factor test for excusable neglect)
- Thompson v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 76 F.3d 530 (4th Cir. 1996) (adopts Pioneer factors for Rule 4(a)(5))
- Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007) (mandates jurisdictional strictness for Rule 4 deadlines)
- Silivanch v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc., 333 F.3d 355 (2d Cir. 2003) (preference for limiting prejudice and delay in excusable neglect analysis)
- United States v. Borromeo, 945 F.2d 750 (4th Cir. 1991) (context for reasoning on excusable neglect factors)