Case Name: John Paul TURNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-21
Citations: 218 F. App'x 233
Docket Number: No. 06-2218
Parties: John Paul TURNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 218
Pages: 233–234

Head Matter:
John Paul TURNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-2218.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 5, 2007.
Decided: Feb. 21, 2007.
John Paul Turner, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
John Paul Turner seeks to appeal the district court's orders dismissing his civil rights complaint for failure to comply with a prefiling injunction and denying his motions for reconsideration and to reopen. 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. 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 (1960)).
The district court's order was entered on the docket on August 6, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on November 8, 2006. Because Turner 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.