Case Name: Mary S. REID, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service Agency, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-04-29
Citations: 275 F. App'x 256
Docket Number: No. 08-1180
Parties: Mary S. REID, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service Agency, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 275
Pages: 256–257

Head Matter:
Mary S. REID, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service Agency, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 08-1180.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 24, 2008.
Decided: April 29, 2008.
Mary S. Reid, Appellant Pro Se. Sidney P. Alexander, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Mary S. Reid seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing her employment discrimination action with prejudice. 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 Carr., 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 November 9, 2007. The notice of appeal was filed on January 31, 2008. Because Reid 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 dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal con tentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.