Cynthia E. Thomas v. United States Postal Service the Postmaster General of the United States

73 F.3d 358, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40400, 1995 WL 761058

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: December 27, 1995
• Docket: 95-2652
• Status: Published

Opinion

73 F.3d 358
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Cynthia E. THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE; the Postmaster General of the
United States, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-2652.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 1995.
Decided Dec. 27, 1995.

Cynthia E. Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Terri Hearn Bailey, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina; David George Karro, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant noted this appeal outside the sixty-day appeal period established by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to relief under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). 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)). The magistrate judge entered his order on April 11, 1995;* Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on August 10, 1995. 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.

DISMISSED

* The magistrate judge exercised jurisdiction upon consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. Sec. 636(c)(1) (West 1993)