Case Name: Darrell COWAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Francis OZIM, Doctor; Karen Rapooche, Supervisor and Head Nurse; Doctor Pergis, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-05-04
Citations: 8 F. App'x 236
Docket Number: No. 01-6072
Parties: Darrell COWAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Francis OZIM, Doctor; Karen Rapooche, Supervisor and Head Nurse; Doctor Pergis, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 8
Pages: 236–236

Head Matter:
Darrell COWAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Francis OZIM, Doctor; Karen Rapooche, Supervisor and Head Nurse; Doctor Pergis, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-6072.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 27, 2001.
Decided May 4, 2001.
Darrell Cowan, pro se.
Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Darrell Cowan appeals the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his claim of inadequate medical care. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Appellant's notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty 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.R.App.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. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 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 August 22, 2000. Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on December 20, 2000. Because Appellant 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.