Gary L. WISE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Director Jon E. OZMINT, individually and in their official capacities; Warden Gregory Knowlin, individually and in their official capacities; Bryan P. Stirling, Acting Agency Director, individually and in their official capacities, Defendants-Appellees, and South Carolina Department of Corrections; Physician Michael J. Beinor, individually and in their official capacities; Dr. Allan C. Walls, individually and in their official capacities; Dr. Alewine, individually and in their official capacities; Physician Benjamin F. Lewis, individually and in their official capacities; Physician James E. Kay, individually and in their official capacities; MD Physician Jack M. Valpey, individually and in their official capacities, Defendants, 625 F. App'x 221

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Gary L. Wise .seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant Defendants’

summary judgment motion and deny Wise’s

summary judgment, motion in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice' of appeal was not timely filed. ■ Parties are accorded 30 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 June 24, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed on July 27, 2015. Because Wise failed to file a timely notice of appeal or obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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.