Pope

MEMORANDUM ***

George Pope appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition and his Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment, 1 which was actually an attempt to remedy his original habeas counsel’s failure to timely file a notice of appeal. 2 We dismiss in part and affirm in part.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Pope’s appeal of the district court’s denial of his habeas petition because of the late filing of his notice of appeal. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) 4(a)’s time limitation on the filing of a notice of appeal 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). Pope has no constitutional right to counsel in these habeas proceedings, and thus bears the risk of attorney error. Murray v. Carrier, 477 U.S. 478, 488 , 106 *615 S.Ct. 2639 , 91 L.Ed.2d 397 (1986); Smith v. Idaho, 392 F.3d 350, 357 (9th Cir.2004), as amended.

The district court correctly ruled that there was no mistake, excusable neglect, or gross negligence warranting Rule 60(b) relief. The district court did not err in declining to provide Pope separate notice of the court’s January 12, 2005…