Shahid L.A. Majid seeks to appeal the district courts amended order adopting the magistrate judges recommendation and dismissing Majids civil action, as well as denying his requests for injunctive relief. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
In civil cases, parties have 30 days after the entry of the district courts 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 entered judgment on October 20, 2020. Shahid filed the notice of appeal on November 25, 2020.
*
Because Shahid failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant Defendants’ motions to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE
. For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date designated by Majid in his certificate of service is the earliest date Majid could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.