Robert Parham, Jr. v. Peter White

Filing 920100324

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8199

ROBERT S. PARHAM, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PETER WHITE; RUBY WILLIAMS; JAMES BAINES; DR. DRAKE; SCOTT HUGHES, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:09-ct-03022-BO)

Submitted:

March 16, 2010

Decided:

March 24, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert S. Parham, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Robert S. Parham, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's (2006). order dismissing his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

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). is "mandatory and jurisdictional." Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) This appeal period

Browder v. Dir., Dep't of (quoting United States v.

Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court's order was entered on the docket on September 29, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on

December 9, 2009.

Because Parham 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