                              UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 01-7648



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus


JAMES DARREN TAYLOR,

                                              Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CR-94-40, CA-98-182-3-V)


Submitted:   March 21, 2002                 Decided:   March 27, 2002


Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


James Darren Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

        James Darren Taylor seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion (West Supp. 2001).                     We

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Appellant’s

notice of appeal was not timely filed.

        Parties   are   accorded   sixty   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 (1978) (quoting United States v.

Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)).

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

26, 2001.    Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed on September 17,

2001.     Because Appellant failed to file a timely notice of appeal

or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we

deny a certificate of appealability and 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
