Addison v. Elmore

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7163 DONALD ADDISON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus L. T. ELMORE, Classification; SERGEANT GERAGHTY, Classification; DAVID P. CURRO, Parole Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-443-A) Submitted: October 3, 2001 Decided: October 15, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Addison, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Donald Addison seeks to appeal the district court’s order dis- missing his civil action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of juris- diction because Addison’s notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the 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 “man- datory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Correc- tions, 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 18, 2001. Addison’s notice of appeal was filed on July 16, 2001.* Because Addison 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED * For the purpose of this appeal we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been given to prison officials for mailing. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988). 2