Cox v. Amonette

Panel rehearing granted and case affirmed by unpublished opinion filed 9/14/00 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6792 ANTONIO COX, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus W. F. AMONETTE; DAVID SMITH, Warden Camp #1; M. AMONETTE, Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-181-7) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 25, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Antonio Cox, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Antonio Cox seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying Cox’s second motion filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Cox’s notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), 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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on April 21, 2000. Cox’s notice of appeal was filed on June 2, 2000. Be- cause Cox 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 conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2