Case Name: Chissell BAKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY, (Official Capacity); Mary Louis Antieau; Alan R. Lewis; Barbara J. Cuffee; Michael M. Debowes; Velvet Grant, all humans in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-06-25
Citations: 530 F. App'x 249
Docket Number: No. 13-1219
Parties: Chissell BAKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY, (Official Capacity); Mary Louis Antieau; Alan R. Lewis; Barbara J. Cuffee; Michael M. Debowes; Velvet Grant, all humans in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 530
Pages: 249–250

Head Matter:
Chissell BAKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY, (Official Capacity); Mary Louis Antieau; Alan R. Lewis; Barbara J. Cuffee; Michael M. Debowes; Velvet Grant, all humans in their individual and official capacities, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-1219.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 20, 2013.
Decided: June 25, 2013.
Chissell Baker, Appellant Pro Se. John David McChesney, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Chissell Baker seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her complaint as time-barred. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty 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 January 15, 2013. The notice of appeal was filed on February 15, 2013, one day late. Because Baker 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.