                               UNPUBLISHED

                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                          FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                               No. 05-7072



PAUL GRAHAM,

                                                Plaintiff - Appellant,

             versus


STATE OF MARYLAND JUDICIARY SYSTEM; STATE OF
MARYLAND; HOWARD COUNTY HOSPITAL; CLIFTON T.
PERKINS HOSPITAL CENTER,

                                               Defendants - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.    Catherine C. Blake, District Judge.
(CA-05-1217)


Submitted:    January 19, 2006               Decided:   January 24, 2006


Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Paul Graham, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

          Paul Graham seeks to appeal the district court’s orders

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and denying his

motion for reconsideration.     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. Director, 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 judgment was entered on the docket

on May 24, 2005.    The notice of appeal was filed on June 28, 2005.

Because Graham 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 -
