Case Name: Carl Benit COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PINKERTON SECURITY; Andrew John Savage, III, Esquire; Edwardo Kelvin Curry, Esquire, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-09-08
Citations: 73 F. App'x 657
Docket Number: No. 03-6883
Parties: Carl Benit COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PINKERTON SECURITY; Andrew John Savage, III, Esquire; Edwardo Kelvin Curry, Esquire, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 73
Pages: 657–658

Head Matter:
Carl Benit COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PINKERTON SECURITY; Andrew John Savage, III, Esquire; Edwardo Kelvin Curry, Esquire, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-6883.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 28, 2003.
Decided Sept. 8, 2003.
Carol Benit Cooper, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Carl Benit Cooper seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and dismissing without prejudice his civil rights complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Appellant's 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, see Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), 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 Corrections, 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 March 4, 2003. Cooper's notice of appeal was filed on May 27, 2003. Because Cooper 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.
We assume for the purpose of this appeal that Cooper's notice of appeal was filed on May 27, 2003, the date it was signed by Cooper. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(c), Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).