Court Opinion

ID: 1021435
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 23:06:33.932061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:10:00.844702
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                           No. 06-7340

MICHAEL A. WEBB,

                                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ANDERSON,

                                             Defendant   - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge.
(7:06-ct-00223-gec-mf)

Submitted:   December 21, 2006            Decided:   January 4, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael A. Webb, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

          Michael A. Webb seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (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 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220,

229 (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

                               - 2 -