Case Name: Ned L. PARKER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMPLOYEES OF CHARLESTON COUNTY; Employees of Charleston County Detention Center; Arresting Officers of North Charleston Police Department, Defendants-Appellees, and Charleston County Detention Center; Bonnie S. Koontz, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-08-20
Citations: 71 F. App'x 267
Docket Number: No. 03-1254
Parties: Ned L. PARKER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMPLOYEES OF CHARLESTON COUNTY; Employees of Charleston County Detention Center; Arresting Officers of North Charleston Police Department, Defendants-Appellees, and Charleston County Detention Center; Bonnie S. Koontz, Defendants.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 71
Pages: 267–268

Head Matter:
Ned L. PARKER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMPLOYEES OF CHARLESTON COUNTY; Employees of Charleston County Detention Center; Arresting Officers of North Charleston Police Department, Defendants-Appellees, and Charleston County Detention Center; Bonnie S. Koontz, Defendants.
No. 03-1254.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 14, 2003.
Decided Aug. 20, 2003.
Ned L. Parker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Senn, Stephanie Pendarvis McDonald, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Ned L. Parker, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss his civil 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. Director, 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 January 10, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on February 19, 2003. Because Parker 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.
Parker mistakenly filed his notice of appeal with this court on February 19, 2003. This court forwarded the notice of appeal to the district court for filing. The notice of appeal was thus filed in the district court on Februaiy 21, 2003. In accordance with Fed. R.App. P. 4(d), Parker's notice of appeal is deemed filed on February 19, 2003, the date the notice of appeal was received by this court and sent to the district court.