                            UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 07-6166



DEBORAH LEE WHEELER,

                                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus


JOEL JACKSON,

                                               Defendant - Appellee.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
Judge. (7:06-cv-00674)



Submitted: June 21, 2007                    Decided:    June 27, 2007


Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Deborah Lee Wheeler, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

              Deborah Lee Wheeler seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing her action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000),

for failure to state a claim.          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 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220,

229 (1960)).

              The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

November 16, 2006.      The notice of appeal was filed on January 30,

2007.   Because Wheeler 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




                                      - 2 -
