Case Name: Georgia L. GILCHRIST, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Marika G. Matthews, Plaintiff, v. Michael KELLEY, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-01
Citations: 395 F. App'x 1001
Docket Number: No. 10-1643
Parties: Georgia L. GILCHRIST, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Marika G. Matthews, Plaintiff, v. Michael KELLEY, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 395
Pages: 1001–1002

Head Matter:
Georgia L. GILCHRIST, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Marika G. Matthews, Plaintiff, v. Michael KELLEY, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 10-1643.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 28, 2010.
Decided: Oct. 1, 2010.
Georgia L. Gilchrist, Appellant pro se.
Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Georgia L. Gilchrist seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice her civil complaint. 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 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 April 20, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on June 7, 2010. Because Gilchrist failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Gilchrist's motion to appoint counsel and 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.