Azubuko v. United States , 144 F. App'x 361 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-1770
    CHUKWUMA E. AZUBUKO,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA-
    04-4000-JFM)
    Submitted:   September 29, 2005           Decided:   October 5, 2005
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Chukwuma E. Azubuko, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Chukwuma E. Azubuko seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order summarily dismissing his action against the United States.
    We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice
    of appeal was not timely filed.
    When the United States or its officer or agency is a
    party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days
    after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order,
    Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), 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 of dismissal was entered on
    the docket on January 5, 2005.    Orders were entered denying post-
    judgment motions on January 24, 2005, February 8, 2005, March 2,
    2005, and March 23, 2005.     The notice of appeal was filed on
    June 30, 2005, ninety-nine days after the last order.       Because
    Azubuko failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an
    extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal.
    - 2 -
    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
    - 3 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-1770

Citation Numbers: 144 F. App'x 361

Judges: Wilkinson, King, Gregory

Filed Date: 10/5/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024