Case Name: Demaris L. GRICE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Frank L. PERRY, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-07-05
Citations: 654 F. App'x 590
Docket Number: No. 15-7844
Parties: Demaris L. GRICE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Frank L. PERRY, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 654
Pages: 590–590

Head Matter:
Demaris L. GRICE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Frank L. PERRY, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 15-7844
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 28, 2016
Decided: July 5, 2016
Demaris L. Grice, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.
Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions áre not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Demaris L. Grice seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on 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 final judgment was entered on the docket on November 26, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on November 13, 2015. Because Grice failed to file a timely notice of appeal or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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).