UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7017 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CRAIG O. COPLEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-90-47-HC) Submitted: October 23, 2003 Decided: October 30, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Craig O. Copley, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Craig O. Copley appeals the district court’s orders denying his pro se motions for discharge and reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Copley’s motions were filed within 180 days of the district court’s revocation of his conditional release and were, thus, premature. See 18 U.S.C. § 4247(d) (2000). In addition, motions for discharge may not be made pro se and, instead, must be filed by either counsel or a legal guardian. Id. Therefore, we affirm. 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 2