Grady Canady appeals the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Canady’s notice of appeal was not timely filed.

When the United States is a party, parties are accorded sixty days after 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 May 7, 2001. Canady’s notice of appeal is deemed to be filed no earlier than August 9, 2001. * Because Canady 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 *117 adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.