
    Gregory J. HINDS, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Respondent.
    No. 2014-3077.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    Aug. 5, 2014.
    
      Gregory J. Hinds, Virginia Beach, VA, pro se.
    Michelle Musgrave, Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before REYNA, BRYSON, and TARANTO, Circuit Judge.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In light of the Department of Homeland Security’s response to this court’s show cause order, we consider whether Gregory J. Hinds’s petition should be dismissed as untimely.

On December 17, 2013, the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) issued a final order denying Hinds’s petition for review. That same day, the Board served Mr. Hinds and his counsel with a copy of its decision via electronic mail. The court received Hinds’s petition for review on March 4, 2014, 77 days after the final order.

Our review of a Board decision or order is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1). That statute provides, in relevant part, that “any petition for review shall be filed within 60 days after the Board issues notice of the final order or decision of the Board.” In order to be timely, a petition for review must be received by the court within the filing deadline. Pinat v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 931 F.2d 1544, 1546 (Fed. Cir.1991) (petition is filed when received by this court); Fed. R.App. P. 25(a)(2)(A) (“filing is not timely unless the clerk receives the papers within the time fixed for filing”). We have explained that this filing period is “statutory, mandatory, [and] jurisdictional.” Monzo v. Dep’t of Transp., 735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed.Cir.1984).

Because Hinds’s appeal was filed outside of. the statutory deadline for taking an appeal to this court, we must dismiss the appeal.

Accordingly,

It is Ordered That:

(1) The appeal is dismissed as untimely.

(2) All other pending motions are denied as moot.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.  