Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony HATCHES, a/k/a Jameel Smith, a/k/a Anthony Dove, a/k/a Ant Hatches, a/k/a Anthony Farvey, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-06-06
Citations: 474 F. App'x 123
Docket Number: No. 12-6310
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony HATCHES, a/k/a Jameel Smith, a/k/a Anthony Dove, a/k/a Ant Hatches, a/k/a Anthony Farvey, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 123–123

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony HATCHES, a/k/a Jameel Smith, a/k/a Anthony Dove, a/k/a Ant Hatches, a/k/a Anthony Farvey, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-6310.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 31, 2012.
Decided: June 6, 2012.
Anthony Hatches, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Mitchell Huber, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia; Jeb Thomas Terrien, Assistant United States Attorney, Harrisonburg, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed-by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Hatches appeals the district court's orders denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B) (2006) motion and motion for reconsideration. We grant Hatches' motion to file supplemental briefs. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Hatches, No. 3:02-cr-00058-NKM-1 (W.D.Va. Feb. 1 & 15, 2012). 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.
AFFIRMED.
The district court did not have authority to grant the motion to reconsider, because a motion to reconsider is not a proper vehicle to seek review of a ruling on a § 3582 motion. United States v. Goodwyn, 596 F.3d 233, 235-36 (4th Cir.2010).