Case Name: Paul GRAHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND JUDICIARY SYSTEM; State of Maryland; Howard County Hospital; Clifton T. Perkins Hospital Center, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-01-24
Citations: 163 F. App'x 216
Docket Number: No. 05-7072
Parties: Paul GRAHAM, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND JUDICIARY SYSTEM; State of Maryland; Howard County Hospital; Clifton T. Perkins Hospital Center, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 163
Pages: 216–217

Head Matter:
Paul GRAHAM, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND JUDICIARY SYSTEM; State of Maryland; Howard County Hospital; Clifton T. Perkins Hospital Center, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 05-7072.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 19, 2006.
Decided Jan. 24, 2006.
Paul Graham, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Paul Graham seeks to appeal the district court's orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. 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 judgment was entered on the docket on May 24, 2005. The notice of appeal was filed on June 28, 2005. Because Graham 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