Don Meredith Cottee seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing his petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) and denying his motion filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). 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. RApp. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. RApp. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. RApp. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting United States *676 v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s orders were entered on the docket on August 2, 2002 (dismissal of § 2254 petition) and September 25, 2002 (denial of R. 59(e) motion). The notice of appeal was filed on October 29, 2002. * Because Cottee failed to file a timely notice of appeal for either of these orders 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.