Case Name: Pamela M. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-01-18
Citations: 407 F. App'x 697
Docket Number: No. 10-2076
Parties: Pamela M. JONES, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 407
Pages: 697–697

Head Matter:
Pamela M. JONES, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 10-2076.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 13, 2011.
Decided: Jan. 18, 2011.
Pamela M. Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Pamela M. Jones seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her civil claims against the United States without prejudice for failure to properly serve the Defendant. 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 14, 2010. The notice of appeal was filed on September 16, 2010. Because Jones 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.