Case Name: Jerome Julius BROWN, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, and Monique Mayes BROWN, Plaintiff, v. M.M. Dove, Attorney General, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-18
Citations: 104 F. App'x 356
Docket Number: No. 04-6692
Parties: Jerome Julius BROWN, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, and Monique Mayes BROWN, Plaintiff, v. M.M. Dove, Attorney General, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 104
Pages: 356–357

Head Matter:
Jerome Julius BROWN, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, and Monique Mayes BROWN, Plaintiff, v. M.M. Dove, Attorney General, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 04-6692.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 12, 2004.
Decided: Aug. 18, 2004.
Jerome Julius Brown, Sr., Appellant pro se.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jerome Julius Brown, Sr. seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion for a rehearing of its order dismissing his complaint without prejudice. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 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 order denying Brown's motion was entered on the docket on June 2, 2000. The notice of appeal was filed on March 8, 2004. Because Brown 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