Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Maurice Calvin DOUGLAS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-03
Citations: 201 F. App'x 929
Docket Number: No. 06-7084
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Maurice Calvin DOUGLAS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 201
Pages: 929–929

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Maurice Calvin DOUGLAS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-7084.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 26, 2006.
Decided: Oct. 3, 2006.
Maurice Calvin Douglas, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Maurice Calvin Douglas, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as successive. 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. 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. 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 (I960)).
The district court's order was entered on the docket on February 6, 2006. The notice of appeal was filed on June 7, 2006. Because Douglas 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.