USCA4 Appeal: 24-1694 Doc: 12 Filed: 11/18/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1694

QUANTILIA CHANEL PARRAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE; KOONS CHEVROLET,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Stephanie A. Gallagher, District Judge. (1:24-cv-00308-SAG)

Submitted: November 14, 2024 Decided: November 18, 2024

Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Quantilia Chanel Parran, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Mara Briones, TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP, Washington, D.C.; Robert Carroll Baker, III, NEUBERGER, QUINN, GIELEN, RUBIN & GIBBER, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-1694 Doc: 12 Filed: 11/18/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Quantilia Chanel Parran seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her

complaint alleging claims under the Truth in Lending Act. 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 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,

(2007).

The district court entered its order on June 14, 2024, and the appeal period expired

on July 15, 2024. Parran filed the notice of appeal on July 24, 2024. Because Parran failed

to file a timely notice of appeal or to 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

2