UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-2317
THOMAS DARBY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
ORANGEBURG, City of; D ALLEN OTT,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (CA-01-4184-22BD-5)
Submitted: January 29, 2004 Decided: February 4, 2004
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas Darby, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Coleman Jones, BOGOSLOW,
JONES, STEPHENS & DUFFIE, P.A., Walterboro, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Thomas Darby seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to
dismiss his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint for failing to allege
a deprivation of a federal right. We dismiss the appeal for lack
of jurisdiction because the 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, 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. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 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
November 1, 2002. The notice of appeal was filed on October 20,
2003. Because Darby 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
- 2 -