Legg v. Staff Max , 54 F. App'x 138 ( 2002 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1504
WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
STAFF MAX,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 02-1963
WILLIAM ALLEN LEGG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
STAFF MAX,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA-
01-2705-DKC)
Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 30, 2002
Before WILKINS and KING, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).
2
PER CURIAM:
William Allen Legg seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
dismissing his discrimination complaint. We dismiss the appeals for
lack of jurisdiction, because the notices of appeal were 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 most recent order of the district court in this case was
entered on the docket on January 22, 2002. Legg’s notices of appeal
were filed on May 7 and August 20, 2002. Because Legg failed to
file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or
reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeals. 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