Court Opinion

ID: 1021430
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 23:06:30.71372+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:09:57.447229
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                           No. 06-7815

RONNIE JUNIOR ELLIS,

                                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

PAUL KITCHIN, Dentist at R.R.J., Stafford, VA;
DOCTOR MARIETTA, Primary Physician of R.R.J.,

                                            Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Walter D. Kelley, Jr., District
Judge. (2:06-cv-00131-WDK)

Submitted:   December 21, 2006            Decided:   January 5, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronnie Junior Ellis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

          Ronnie Junior Ellis 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 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220,

229 (1960)).

          The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

June 30, 2006.   The notice of appeal was filed on October 25, 2006.

Because Ellis 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

                                - 2 -