Case Name: Mark Ryland DOWDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; Cheryl Brown; Bafney Brown; A. John Vollino; Justin Shelton; Cynthia L. McCoy, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-05-10
Citations: 473 F. App'x 234
Docket Number: No. 11-7612
Parties: Mark Ryland DOWDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; Cheryl Brown; Bafney Brown; A. John Vollino; Justin Shelton; Cynthia L. McCoy, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 473
Pages: 234–234

Head Matter:
Mark Ryland DOWDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; Cheryl Brown; Bafney Brown; A. John Vollino; Justin Shelton; Cynthia L. McCoy, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 11-7612.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 18, 2012.
Decided: May 10, 2012.
Mark Ryland Dowdy, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Mark Ryland Dowdy seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint as frivolous. 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 October 25, 2011. The notice of appeal was filed on November 27, 2011. Because Dowdy 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
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).