Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennis Merrimon WATERS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-01-21
Citations: 361 F. App'x 492
Docket Number: No. 09-7877
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennis Merrimon WATERS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 361
Pages: 492–493

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennis Merrimon WATERS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-7877.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 14, 2010.
Decided: Jan. 21, 2010.
Dennis Merrimon Waters, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dennis Merrimon Waters seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion seeking relief under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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. See Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).
The district court's order was entered on the docket on May 18, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on September 28, 2009. Because Waters 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.
For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R.App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).