
    Lenir RICHARDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lorraine NORDULAND, Honorable; Jane M. Roush, Honorable, Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 05-1209.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 14, 2005.
    Decided: April 20, 2005.
    Lenir Richardson, Appellant pro se.
    Stephen Michael Hall, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Lenir Richardson seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her complaint as frivolous. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Appellant’s 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, 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. RApp. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 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 order was entered on the docket on January 25, 2005. Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed on February 25, 2005, or one day beyond the appeal period. Because Appellant 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  