
    HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard D. MEDLIN, Defendant-Appellant, Denise M. Smith, Respondent, Hearthside Builders and Developers, Incorporated; Eastland Developers, Incorporated; Gardner H. Altman, Jr.; Mid-South Property Management, Incorporated; Michael T. Mills; Landfall Associates; Leland Partnership; Thomas L. Downs, Jr., d/b/a Pro’s Automotive and Sales; Lawyers Title of North Carolina, Incorporated; The Door Christian Fellowship Church, Incorporated, Garnishees, and Cyllene M. Medlin; Edward H. Medlin, Individually; Brookstone Developers, Incorporated; McBeth & Moore, Incorporated; Sunbelt Diversities Corporation; The Keys Corporation; Eugene Boyce, As Trustee of the Trust of Amanda Nicole Medlin Under the Trust Agreement Dated January 4, 1993; Buncombe County, North Carolina; Leader Construction Company, Incorporated, Defendants.
    No. 02-1289.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 8, 2002.
    Decided Oct. 30, 2002.
    Richard D. Medlin, Appellant Pro Se. Louie Franklin Elmore, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, Greenville, South Carolina; Daniel Lee Brawley, Sr., Ward & Smith, P.A., Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Richard D. Medlin seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b)(5) motion for relief from judgment. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Medliris 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. 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, 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 10, 2002. Medliris notice of appeal was filed on February 19, 2002. Because Medlin 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. 
      
       Because Medlin is a prisoner, his notice of appeal is considered filed the day it is signed and delivered to prison authorities. Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).
     