Jonathan Giannone appeals the district court’s oral order denying his motion for bail pending appeal. We have reviewed the record and find that Giannone failed to show that his appeal will raise a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in either reversal, an order for a new trial, a sentence that does not include a term of imprisonment, or a reduced sentence to a term of imprisonment less than the total of time already served plus the expected duration of the appeal process. See 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b)(1)(B); United States v. Steinhom, 927 F.2d 195, 196 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm. * We also deny his motion for appointment of counsel, 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.

AFFIRMED.