Court Opinion

ID: 1013131
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 20:55:51.712117+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:31.958563
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 03-7680

WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG,

                                             Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

DR. HELSEL; DR. PETRIVECH; DOCTOR KASHYAP;
HAZEL LAING; TREAT TEAM,

                                            Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.    Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge.
(CA-03-1923-8-DKC)

Submitted:   April 15, 2004                 Decided:   April 20, 2004

Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Allen Legg, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

           William Allen Legg seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition.   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 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220,

229 (1960)).

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

July 15, 2003.    The notice of appeal was filed on September 16,

2003.   Because Legg 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 -