Case Name: Pamela BOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND BOARD OF NURSING; Future Care, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-01-26
Citations: 590 F. App'x 253
Docket Number: No. 14-1957
Parties: Pamela BOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND BOARD OF NURSING; Future Care, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 590
Pages: 253–254

Head Matter:
Pamela BOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARYLAND BOARD OF NURSING; Future Care, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-1957.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 22, 2015.
Decided: Jan. 26, 2015.
Pamela Sue Bond, Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Bruno DeFranco, Douglas F. Gansler, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland; Charles R. Bacharach, Gordon Feinblatt LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Pamela Bond seeks to appeal the district court's order granting Defendants' motions to dismiss Bond's civil suit. 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 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 July 24, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on September 11, 2014. Because Bond 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 deny Bond's motion to admit evidence. 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.