Case Name: Antwan ZEIGLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis BUSH, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-04-01
Citations: 643 F. App'x 257
Docket Number: No. 15-7899
Parties: Antwan ZEIGLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis BUSH, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 643
Pages: 257–258

Head Matter:
Antwan ZEIGLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis BUSH, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 15-7899.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 29, 2016.
Decided: April 1, 2016.
Antwan Zeigler, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Antwan Zeigler seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. 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 order was entered on the docket on September 22, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on November 18, 2015. Because Zeigler 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.
For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R.App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).