
    Lawrence Verline WILDER, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Brenda J. DAVIS, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 08-1268.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 12, 2010.
    Decided: March 30, 2010.
    Lawrence Veriine Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
    Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Lawrence Veriine Wilder, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider the denial of his request to reopen a civil action that has been closed for ten years. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion. See Heyman v. M.L. Mktg. Co., 116 F.3d 91, 94 (4th Cir.1997) (providing standard). Accordingly, we deny Wilder’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 
      
       Wilder filed a pro se notice of appeal outside of the appeal period, and we remanded to the district court to determine whether Wilder had demonstrated excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the appeal period. See Wilder v. Davis, 298 Fed.Appx. 225 (4th Cir.2008). The district court found Wilder demonstrated excusable neglect and therefore deemed the notice of appeal timely filed. Accordingly, we review the appeal on the merits.
     