Case Name: Michael A. WEBB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Correctional Officer ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-01-04
Citations: 212 F. App'x 188
Docket Number: No. 06-7340
Parties: Michael A. WEBB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Correctional Officer ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 212
Pages: 188–189

Head Matter:
Michael A. WEBB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Correctional Officer ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-7340.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 21, 2006.
Decided: Jan. 4, 2007.
Michael A. Webb, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Michael A. Webb seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2000) complaint. 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 April 25, 2006. The notice of appeal was filed on June 22, 2006. Because Webb 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.