Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andrea Melinda GLEATON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-22
Citations: 171 F. App'x 985
Docket Number: No. 05-7607
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Andrea Melinda GLEATON, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 171
Pages: 985–985

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Andrea Melinda GLEATON, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-7607.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 28, 2006.
Decided: March 22, 2006.
Andrea Melinda Gleaton, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Andrea Melinda Gleaton seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on her 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States is a party, a notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 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 judgment was entered on the docket on May 21, 2004. The notice of appeal, which Gleaton herself dated August 29, 2005, was late. Because Gleaton 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
For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).