ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

This matter is before the court on the government’s motion to enforce the appeal waiver contained in defendant Jesse Le-Clair, Jr.’s plea agreement. The motion is filed pursuant to United States v. Hahn, 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc). Defendant’s counsel filed a response to the motion to enforce stating his belief that there are no meritorious grounds upon which defendant can urge denial of the government’s motion to enforce the appeal waiver, and he requested permission to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) (authorizing counsel to request permission to withdraw where counsel conscientiously examines a case and determines that an appeal would be wholly frivolous). This court then gave defendant an opportunity to file a pro se response to the government’s Hahn motion. In response, defendant filed a request to withdraw his appeal.

Accordingly, the government’s motion is GRANTED, the appeal is DISMISSED, and defense counsel’s motion to withdraw is DENIED as moot.