Legg v. Staff Max

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1504 WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STAFF MAX, Defendant - Appellee. No. 02-1963 WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STAFF MAX, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 01-2705-DKC) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 30, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Allen Legg, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: William Allen Legg seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing his discrimination complaint. We dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction, because the notices of appeal were not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty 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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The most recent order of the district court in this case was entered on the docket on January 22, 2002. Legg’s notices of appeal were filed on May 7 and August 20, 2002. Because Legg failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeals. 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