UNITED STATES v. REARDON (2019)

John Thomas Reardon appeals from the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2012) motion for reduction of his sentence. The district court determined that Reardon was ineligible for a sentence reduction under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A). On appeal, Reardon provides reasons that his sentence should be lowered, but he does not challenge the district court's conclusion that he is ineligible for a § 3582 reduction. Accordingly, he has waived review of this issue. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (“The [c]ourt will limit its review to the issues raised in the informal brief.”); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (noting importance of Rule 34(b)).

As such, we affirm the district court's order. 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

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.