Case Name: Cornelius Leroy CHASE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby SHERON, Warden, Douglas F. Garisler, Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-04-20
Citations: 600 F. App'x 113
Docket Number: No. 14-7695
Parties: Cornelius Leroy CHASE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby SHERON, Warden, Douglas F. Garisler, Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 600
Pages: 113–114

Head Matter:
Cornelius Leroy CHASE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby SHERON, Warden, Douglas F. Garisler, Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 14-7695.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 16, 2015.
Decided: April 20, 2015.
Cornelius Leroy Chase, Appellant Pro Se.
Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cornelius Leroy Chase seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition without prejudice. 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. RApp. 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. RApp. 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 November 21, 2011. The notice of appeal was filed on November 5, 2014. Because Chase 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 con tentions 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.