Case ID: f-appx_144/html/0361-01.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

Chukwuma E. AZUBUKO, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
    No. 05-1770.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 29, 2005.
    Decided: Oct. 5, 2005.
    Chukwuma E. Azubuko, Appellant pro se.
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(e).
   PER CURIAM:

Chukwuma E. Azubuko seeks to appeal the district court’s order summarily dismissing his action against the United States. 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. RApp. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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. Director, 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 (I960)).

The district court’s order of dismissal was entered on the docket on January 5, 2005. Orders were entered denying post-judgment motions on January 24, 2005, February 8, 2005, March 2, 2005, and March 23, 2005. The notice of appeal was filed on June 30, 2005, ninety-nine days after the last order. Because Azubuko 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