UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6452 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY B. ALEXANDER, Defendant - Appellant. No. 01-6500 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY B. ALEXANDER, Defendant - Appellant. No. 01-6571 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY B. ALEXANDER, Defendant - Appellant. No. 01-6572 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY B. ALEXANDER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CA-98-106-3-V, CR-95-178-V) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: July 31, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. No. 01-6452 dismissed and Nos. 01-6500, 00-6571, and 00-6572 affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony B. Alexander, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: In Appeal Number 01-6452, Tony B. Alexander appeals from the district court’s order denying his motions for a certificate of appealability, for relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6), for a ruling on his Rule 60(b)(6) motion and his motion for a certificate of appealability, and for a rehearing and to supplement his Rule 60(b)(3), (4) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Alexander’s motion for appointment of counsel, deny his motion for a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Alexander, Nos. CR-95-178-V; CA-98-106-3-V (W.D.N.C. Mar. 2, 2001). In Appeal Number 01-6500, Alexander appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion for a downward departure. Appeal Number 01-6571 is Alexander’s appeal from the district court’s denial of his motion for relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3), (4), and Number 01-6572 is Alexander’s appeal from the denial of his emergency motion requesting the issuance of an opinion on his Rule 60(b)(3), (4) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. According- ly, we deny Alexander’s motions for appointment of counsel in each of these appeals and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Alexander, No. CR-95-178 (W.D.N.C. filed Mar. 12, 2001, entered Mar. 13, 2001; entered Mar. 26, 2001; filed Mar. 26, 3 2001, entered Mar. 27, 2001). 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. No. 01-6452 - DISMISSED Nos. 01-6500/71/72 - AFFIRMED 4