UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7838

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CHONG CHAO CHEN, a/k/a #21,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR- 94-156-S, CA-98-3362-S)

Submitted: October 21, 1999 Decided: October 26, 1999

Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chong Chao Chen, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew George Warrens Norman, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Chong Chao Chen seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under

(West Supp.

1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin-

ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif-

icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Chen, Nos. CR-94-156-S;

CA-98-3362-S (D. Md. Oct. 13,* 1999). We deny Chen’s motion for

judicial notice and 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.

DISMISSED

* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on October 8, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on October 13, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v. Murray,

(4th Cir. 1986).

2