Remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Tyrone Johnson, a North Carolina inmate, seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) federal habeas petition. The district court’s final order was entered on March 31, 2015. We construe Johnson’s notice of appeal as having been filed, at the earliest, on August 4, 2015, the date appearing on that document. See 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). In his notice of appeal, John *109 son stated that he did not receive notice of the district court’s order until August 3, 2015.

Parties are accorded 30 days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. RApp. 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).

Johnson’s notice of appeal is clearly untimely. However, under Rule 4(a)(6), the district court may reopen the time to file an appeal if (1) the moving party did not receive notice of entry of judgment within 21 days after entry, (2) the motion is filed within 180 days of entry of judgment or within 14 days of receiving notice from the court, whichever is earlier, and (3) rio party would be prejudiced. We remand for the limited purpose of permitting the district court to determine whether Johnson is entitled to the benefit of Rule 4(a)(6) to reopen the time to file an appeal. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED.