Case Name: Bruce Bernard TOWNSEND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-08-04
Citations: 436 F. App'x 946
Docket Number: No. 11-10188
Parties: Bruce Bernard TOWNSEND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILSON, PRYOR and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 436
Pages: 946–946

Head Matter:
Bruce Bernard TOWNSEND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 11-10188
Non-Argument Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Aug. 4, 2011.
Bruce Bernard Townsend, Jesup, GA, pro se.
R. Brian Tanner, James Christian Stuc-hell, Edward J. Tarver, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Savannah, GA, for Respondent-Ap-pellee.
Before WILSON, PRYOR and BLACK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Bruce Townsend appeals pro se the dismissal of his motion to vacate. 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court dismissed Townsend's motion as successive, id. § 2244(b)(3), but the United States concedes that the district court had failed to notify Townsend before reclassifying an earlier pleading as a motion to vacate, as required by Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375, 124 S.Ct. 786, 157 L.Ed.2d 778 (2003). Consequently, Townsend's motion to vacate is not successive. We VACATE the order dismissing Townsend's motion to vacate as successive, and we REMAND for further proceedings.
VACATED AND REMANDED.