Case Name: Rayvern Earl GREEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A.J. PADULA, Warden; Judge Byars, SCDC Director, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-02
Citations: 516 F. App'x 282
Docket Number: No. 13-6109
Parties: Rayvern Earl GREEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A.J. PADULA, Warden; Judge Byars, SCDC Director, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 516
Pages: 282–283

Head Matter:
Rayvern Earl GREEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A.J. PADULA, Warden; Judge Byars, SCDC Director, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-6109.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 28, 2013.
Decided: April 2, 2013.
Rayvern Earl Green, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rayvern Earl Green seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 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 ap peal 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 August 24, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on January 22, 2013. Because Green failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension 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.