Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Evangelo Randolph BOWDEN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-03-04
Citations: 558 F. App'x 304
Docket Number: No. 13-7402
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Evangelo Randolph BOWDEN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 558
Pages: 304–305

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Evangelo Randolph BOWDEN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-7402.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 27, 2014.
Decided: March 4, 2014.
G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Evangelo Randolph Bowden seeks to appeal the district court's order granting in part and denying in part his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 July 1, 2013. The notice of appeal was filed on September 3, 2013. Because Bowden 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.