Case ID: f-appx_71/html/0269-01.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

Richard GREENE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The State of MARYLAND; Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation; Barry Cooper; Nelson Fitzgerald, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 03-1747.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 14, 2003.
    Decided Aug. 20, 2003.
    Richard Greene, Jr., Appellant pro se. Julie Ellen Squire, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Richard Greene, Jr. seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to alter or amend its judgment denying relief on his employment discrimination action. 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. 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, 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 was entered on the docket on May 6, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on June 6, 2003. Because Greene 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.