Case Name: Terence Keith JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUNTRUST BANK, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-12-13
Citations: 158 F. App'x 424
Docket Number: No. 05-1558
Parties: Terence Keith JOHNSON, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. SUNTRUST BANK, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 158
Pages: 424–425

Head Matter:
Terence Keith JOHNSON, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. SUNTRUST BANK, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 05-1558.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 30, 2005.
Decided Dec. 13, 2005.
Terence Keith Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Terence Keith Johnson appeals the district court's order denying his motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal. Because the time periods governed by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure are "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), the district court properly found that it was without jurisdiction to grant the extension where more than sixty days had elapsed since the entry of the final order. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Johnson v. SunTrust Bank, No. CA-03-937-3 (E.D.Va. May 19, 2005). 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.
AFFIRMED