Case Name: Anthony MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Timothy STEWART, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2018-01-09
Citations: 708 F. App'x 118
Docket Number: No. 17-6990
Parties: Anthony MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Timothy STEWART, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 708
Pages: 118–119

Head Matter:
Anthony MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Timothy STEWART, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 17-6990
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: December 20, 2017
Decided: January 9, 2018
Anthony Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Kelly O. Hayes, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Moore, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court's orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition and denying his motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Moore has failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) is an inadequate or ineffective means of challenging the validity of his detention. See Rice v. Rivera, 617 F.3d 802, 807 (4th Cir. 2010); United States v. Poole, 531 F.3d 263, 267 n.7 (4th Cir. 2008). As such, the district court lacked jurisdiction over Moore's petition. Rice, 617 F.3d at 807. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court's orders. However, we modify the dismissal order, Moore v. Stewart, No. 8:15-cv-02440-GJH, 2016 WL 5200869 (D. Md., filed Sept. 15, 2016 & entered Sept. 16, 2016), to reflect a dismissal without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, and affirm the dismissal as modified, 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED