¶1 Randal E. Faris seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as untimely filed. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
¶2 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, 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)).
¶3 The district court’s judgment was entered on the docket on October 25, 2005. * The notice of appeal was filed on January 25, 2006. Because Faris 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 *187 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
¶4 DISMISSED
¶5 This date gives Faris the benefit of Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379. 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).