Case Name: Francisco Javier NARANJO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cecilia REYNOLDS, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-28
Citations: 399 F. App'x 834
Docket Number: No. 10-6957
Parties: Francisco Javier NARANJO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cecilia REYNOLDS, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 399
Pages: 834–835

Head Matter:
Francisco Javier NARANJO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cecilia REYNOLDS, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 10-6957.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 20, 2010.
Decided: Oct. 28, 2010.
Francisco Javier Naranjo, Appellant pro se.
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Francisco Javier Naranjo seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties ai*e 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 March 17, 2010. The notice of appeal was filed on July 9, 2010. Because Naranjo failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.