Case Name: Fred A. HOPKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Deborah Hopkins, Plaintiff, v. The MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-03-19
Citations: 597 F. App'x 753
Docket Number: No. 14-2290
Parties: Fred A. HOPKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Deborah Hopkins, Plaintiff, v. The MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 597
Pages: 753–754

Head Matter:
Fred A. HOPKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Deborah Hopkins, Plaintiff, v. The MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 14-2290.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 17, 2015.
Decided: March 19, 2015.
Fred A. Hopkins, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Fred A. Hopkins seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his civil complaint for failure to state a claim. 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 September 15, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on November 24, 2014. Because Hopkins 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.