Case Name: State of NORTH CAROLINA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorraine Blackwell LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-07-24
Citations: 535 F. App'x 262
Docket Number: No. 13-6432
Parties: State of NORTH CAROLINA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorraine Blackwell LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 535
Pages: 262–262

Head Matter:
State of NORTH CAROLINA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lorraine Blackwell LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-6432.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 15, 2013.
Decided: July 24, 2013.
Lorraine Blackwell Lewis, Appellant Pro Se.
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lorraine Blackwell Lewis seeks to appeal the district court's order denying her self-styled "Writ of Habeus [sic] Corpus for Evidentiary [sic] Hearing" for lack of jurisdiction. 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. RApp. 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 November 1, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on March 19, 2013. Because Lewis 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.