Case ID: f-appx_71/html/0283-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Manuel Raul MONTERO, a/k/a Reyo Pena Garcia, a/k/a Reyes Pena, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William Jefferson CLINTON, Former President, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 03-6774.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 14, 2003.
    Decided Aug. 21, 2003.
    
      Manuel Raul Montero, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Manuel Raul Montero seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2000) complaint for failure to comply with a court order and denying reconsideration. 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. RApp. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. RApp. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s order denying reconsideration was entered on the docket on March 3, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on May 5, 2003. Because Montero 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.