Carl Fredrick Kieffer v. Green, B.R.C.C., Officer Hardy, Officer Rice

943 F.2d 49, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 25462, 1991 WL 172733

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: September 9, 1991
• Docket: 91-6587
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

943 F.2d 49

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Carl Fredrick KIEFFER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
GREEN, B.R.C.C., Officer Hardy, Officer Rice, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 91-6587.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 26, 1991.
Decided Sept. 9, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-90-1906-N)

Carl Frederick Kieffer, appellant pro se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Carl Fredrick Kieffer noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period established by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), and failed to move for an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5). The time periods established by Fed.R.App.P. 4 are "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)). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore 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.