Leroy M. Thurston, Jr v. CATHY COLLINS, Manager, Central Virginia Newspaper

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1447
LEROY M. THURSTON, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CATHY COLLINS, Manager, Central Virginia
Newspaper,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 02-1448
LEROY M. THURSTON, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CALVIN JACKSON,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 02-1449
LEROY M. THURSTON, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,

-- 1 of 3 --

2
versus
THOMAS ROBERTS,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District
Judge. (CA-02-14-3, CA-02-15-3, CA-02-16-3)
Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 23, 2002
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leroy M. Thurston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Leroy M. Thurston, Jr. seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders dismissing his civil actions for lack of jurisdiction. We
dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction because Thurston’s
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, see
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), 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
Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v.
Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)).
The district court’s orders were entered on the docket on
February 11, 2002. Thurston’s notices of appeal were filed on
April 9, 2002. Because Thurston 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 of 3 --