Case ID: f-appx_615/html/0127-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Daryl K. GIBSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CORNING INC.; Mario Scarletto; Bill Kerns; Keith Howel; Jim Enos; Cadena McPearson; Annia M. Allgretto; Larry Sutton, Defendants-Ap-pellees.
    No. 15-1624.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 27, 2015.
    Decided: Aug. 31, 2015.
    Daryl K. Gibson, Appellant Ero Se. Terry Allen Clark, Robin Elizabeth Shea, Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLC, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

-Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Daryl K. Gibson seeks to appeal the district court’s judgment in his civil action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under • Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).

The district court’s judgment was entered on the docket on April 14, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on June 8, 20Í5. Because Gibson failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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. .