UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 14-7624


DWIGHT WHITE,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

ROBERT G. JONES,

                Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.  L. Patrick Auld,
Magistrate Judge. (1:11-cv-00773-LPA-LPA)


Submitted:   February 25, 2015             Decided:   March 2, 2015


Before NIEMEYER, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Dwight White, Appellant Pro Se.    Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            Dwight White seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s

order    dismissing   his    28   U.S.C.   § 2254   (2012)   petition. 1    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, 

, 214 (2007).

            The magistrate judge’s order was entered on the docket

on April 30, 2014.          The notice of appeal was filed on October

21, 2014. 2     Because White 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 dispense with oral argument because the facts



     1
        The parties consented to the jurisdiction                    of    the
magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012).
     2
       For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date
appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could
have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to
the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 

(1988).



                                       2
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before   this   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.



                                                                    DISMISSED




                                     3