UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7127
ANDRE WHITE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
LISA HOLLINGSWORTH, Warden; R. SHOOK; M.
MOUBEARK; D. WILLIAMS; D. MULL; K.M. WHITE;
HARRELL WATTS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge.
(1:06-cv-02104-AMD)
Submitted: September 11, 2007 Decided: September 17, 2007
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andre White, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer A. Wright, Assistant
United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Andre White seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of
appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a
party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days
after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order,
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 district court’s order was entered on the docket on
March 26,2007. The notice of appeal was filed on July 21, 2007.*
Because White 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
*
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 properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the
court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).
- 2 -
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 3 -