UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1304
GERALD HAWKINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ARAMARK FACILITIES SERVICES, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
DON WIGGINS,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00-
1581-L)
Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 6, 2002
Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY,* Circuit Judges.
*
Judge Gregory did not participate in consideration of this
case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 46(d).
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gerald Hawkins, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Ross Niccolini,
MCGUIREWOODS, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
2
PER CURIAM:
Gerald Hawkins seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing his civil action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction because Appellant’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
“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
February 7, 2001. Hawkins’ notice of appeal was filed on March 13,
2002. Because Hawkins 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
3