UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ryan Lee ZATER, Defendant-Appellant, 600 F. App'x 136

Affirmed in part dismissed in part by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ryan Lee Zater appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence. We agree with the district court that . neither 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) nor Fed.R. Crim.P. 35 authorizes such a reduction, and we therefore affirm the district court’s ruling. The court also ruled that Zater’s motion was, in effect, an unauthorized successive motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) over which it lacked jurisdiction.

The district court’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction over a successive motion without authorization from this court is not debatable or wrong. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244, 2253(c)(1)(B), 2255(h) (2012). Therefore, to the extent Zater seeks to challenge that decision, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, we affirm in part and dismiss in part. 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 IN PART, DISMISSED 7-AT D/j T>rp