Case Name: William Clyde KARAMPOUR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bryan WATSON, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-12-23
Citations: 304 F. App'x 180
Docket Number: No. 08-7270
Parties: William Clyde KARAMPOUR, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bryan WATSON, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 304
Pages: 180–181

Head Matter:
William Clyde KARAMPOUR, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bryan WATSON, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 08-7270.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 16, 2008.
Decided: Dec. 23, 2008.
William Clyde Karampour, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
William Clyde Karampour seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). 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. RApp. 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 December 14, 2007, 2007 WL 4468684. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on July 10, 2008. Because Karampour 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.