Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Marie Therese Assa'ad-Faltas seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying her motions to intervene in two district court actions, and its order denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction because Assa'ad-Faltas did not timely appeal.

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). When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). Although the district court may extend the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopen the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6), "the timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement." Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court's orders were entered on the docket on November 7, 2011, November 10, 2011, and December 14, 2011, respectively. The notice of appeal was filed on February 17, 2012. Because Assa'ad-Faltas failed to file timely notices of appeal or obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal periods, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeals. We also deny as moot Assa'ad-Faltas's motions to file a surreply brief and to place the appeals in abeyance pending the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. United States, 132 S.Ct. 2492 (2012).

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.