UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6990
BENJAMIN EARL COX,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DANIEL L. STIENEKE; MACK JARVIS; DAVID
CHESTER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge.
(CA-98-267-5-F)
Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: January 6, 1999
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Benjamin Earl Cox, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Benjamin Earl Cox filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dis-
miss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices
of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are
“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)). Parties to civil actions have
thirty days within which to file in the district court notices of
appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1).
The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district
court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or
reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).
The district court entered its order on May 11, 1998; Cox’s
notice of appeal was filed on June 29, 1998, which is beyond the
thirty-day appeal period. His failure to note a timely appeal or
obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves this court without
jurisdiction to consider the merits of Cox’s appeal. We therefore
dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
2