Case Name: Zhenlu ZHANG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, (STC), Defendant-Appellee, and Computer Sciences Corporation, (CSC), Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-27
Citations: 219 F. App'x 307
Docket Number: No. 06-2225
Parties: Zhenlu ZHANG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, (STC), Defendant-Appellee, and Computer Sciences Corporation, (CSC), Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 219
Pages: 307–307

Head Matter:
Zhenlu ZHANG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, (STC), Defendant-Appellee, and Computer Sciences Corporation, (CSC), Defendant.
No. 06-2225.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 22, 2007.
Decided: Feb. 27, 2007.
Zhenlu Zhang, Appellant Pro Se. Henry Adam Platt, J.C. Miller, Schmeltzer, Aptaker & Shepard, P.C., Washington, D.C.; Edward Lee Isler, Steven William Ray, Isler, Dare, Ray & Radcliffe, P.C., Vienna, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Zhenlu Zhang seeks to appeal the district court's order awarding attorney fees and costs. 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 September 28, 2006. The notice of appeal was received by the district court on October 31, 2006. Because Zhang 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.