Court Opinion

ID: 1004449
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 18:41:27.278496+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:08:11.274024
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 01-1171

BRUCE L. MCNEIL,

                                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Department of
Transportation,

                                               Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief Dis-
trict Judge. (CA-00-886-5-BO)

Submitted:   May 17, 2001                   Decided:   May 23, 2001

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bruce L. McNeil, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Bruce L. McNeil seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing his suit.     We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdic-

tion because McNeil’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

     Parties are accorded thirty days after entry of the district

court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App.

P. 4(a)(1), 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 Corrections, 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

December 27, 2000.     McNeil’s notice of appeal was filed on Janu-

ary 29, 2001.   Because McNeil 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 ma-

terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

                                                           DISMISSED

                                   2