Case Name: Gregory Allen GANT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-09-17
Citations: 478 F. App'x 770
Docket Number: No. 12-7152
Parties: Gregory Allen GANT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 478
Pages: 770–771

Head Matter:
Gregory Allen GANT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 12-7152.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 11, 2012.
Decided: Sept. 17, 2012.
Gregory Allen Gant, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gregory Allen Gant seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint as untimely. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties in cases in which the United States is not involved 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 Gant seeks to appeal was entered on the docket on May 31, 2012. We deem Gant's notice of appeal to have been filed no earlier than July 5, 2012, the date he signed it. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988). Thus, Gant's notice of appeal was five days late. Because Gant failed to file a timely notice of appeal or obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal peri od, 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.