Case Name: Jerome J. WEST, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. D.A. BRAXTON; A. Kelly Harrison; Naseer Mobashar, Doctor, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-03-10
Citations: 269 F. App'x 265
Docket Number: No. 07-7733
Parties: Jerome J. WEST, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. D.A. BRAXTON; A. Kelly Harrison; Naseer Mobashar, Doctor, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 269
Pages: 265–265

Head Matter:
Jerome J. WEST, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. D.A. BRAXTON; A. Kelly Harrison; Naseer Mobashar, Doctor, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-7733.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 28, 2008.
Decided: March 10, 2008.
Jerome J. West, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jerome J. West seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his complaint without prejudice. 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 February 15, 2000. The notice of appeal was filed on November 15, 2007. Because West failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal and deny the motion for appointment of counsel. 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).