
    Howard G. BROWN, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. James V. PEGUESE; Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents—Appellees.
    No. 05-6075.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 18, 2005.
    Decided: June 3, 2005.
    Howard G. Brown, Jr., Appellant pro se.
    Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Howard G. Brown, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as untimely. 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). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s judgment was entered on the docket on October 6, 2004. According Brown the benefit of Fed. RApp. P. 4(c), the notice of appeal was filed on December 10, 2004. Because Brown 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  