Case ID: f-appx_8/html/0227-01.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

Isaiah HARLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Defendants-Appellee.
    No. 01-1180.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 27, 2001.
    Decided May 4, 2001.
    
      Isaiah Harley, pro se.
    Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

Isaiah Harley seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint as frivolous. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Harley’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

In actions where the United States is a party, parties are accorded sixty days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), 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 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on October 18, 2000. Harley’s notice of appeal was filed on January 29, 2001. Because Harley failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We deny Harley’s motions for extraordinary relief and to strike a district court’s order and 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.