USCA4 Appeal: 23-6357 Doc: 6 Filed: 02/29/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6357

WILLIAM HERBERT MCCLADDIE, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN OF EVANS CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (6:22-cv-01192-RMG)

Submitted: February 27, 2024, Decided: February 29, 2024

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Herbert McCladdie, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6357 Doc: 6 Filed: 02/29/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: After the district court denied his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, William Herbert McCladdie filed a Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion seeking reconsideration of his claims. The district court construed this motion as an unauthorized, successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. McCladdie then filed another motion contesting his conviction. The district court construed this motion as seeking reconsideration of the denial of his Rule 60(b) motion and denied it on the merits.

We have reviewed the record and conclude that McCladdie’s motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of his Rule 60(b) motion for lack of jurisdiction is also an unauthorized, successive § 2254 petition. See Bixby v. Stirling, 90 F.4th 140, 155 (4th Cir. 2024). As such, the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider this motion, id. at 154, and, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b), was required to dismiss it as an unauthorized, successive § 2254 petition.

Because the district court denied, rather than dismissed the motion, we vacate the district court’s order and remand to the district court with instructions to dismiss the motion for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED