
    Ross Allen BERRYMAN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Superintendent Randy LEE, Respondent—Appellee.
    No. 08-6249.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 24, 2008.
    Decided: April 30, 2008.
    Ross Allen Berryman, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM:

Ross Allen Berryman seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. 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. Dir., 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 order was entered on the docket on October 30, 2000. The notice of appeal was filed on January 8, 2008. Because Berryman 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 matei’ials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED. 
      
       For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R.App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).
     