OPINION ON REHEARING
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6077
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM R. ATKINS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (CR-88-291-A, CA-97-1351-AM)
Submitted: March 9, 1999 Decided: May 5, 1999
Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William R. Atkins, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Roland Barr, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
William R. Atkins seeks to appeal separate orders entered by
the district court denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. §
2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998), and denying his motion for recon-
sideration. By court order, the panel granted Atkins’ petition for
rehearing and vacated its decision of September 1, 1998.
Atkins filed an untimely notice of appeal. We accordingly
dismiss 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 in-
volving the United States are accorded sixty days within which to
file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or
final orders. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). Exceptions to the ap-
peal period obtain only if 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 denying Atkins’ § 2255
motion on September 19, 1997, and entered its order denying Atkins’
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion for reconsideration on October 10,
1997. Thus, Atkins had until December 9, 1997, within which to
submit his notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c). Atkins’
notice of appeal was dated December 10, 1997, and filed on December
2
22, 1997. The district court did not extend the appeal period.
Accordingly, Atkins’ failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an
extension of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdic-
tion to consider the merits of his appeal from either the denial of
the § 2255 motion or the denial of his motion for reconsideration.
We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
appeal as to those orders.
Atkins also appealed from the district court’s order denying
several post-judgment collateral motions. We have reviewed the
record and find that the district court’s denial of these motions
was not an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal
of these orders. 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