Maxon Harvey Morgan, federal prisoner #239980-034, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to compel the Government to file a motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to Rule 35(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the denial of his discovery motion under Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Morgan argues that the Government was required to file a motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Proce *349 dure based on his substantial assistance in providing information in the criminal prosecution of another individual. He does not argue that the Government’s refusal to file a Rule 35 motion was based on an unconstitutional motive. See, e.g., United States v. Grant, 493 F.3d 464, 467 (5th Cir. 2007). He has also failed to show that the Government either was compelled to file or bargained away its discretion concerning whether to file a Rule 35 motion. See United States v. Price, 95 F.3d 364, 368 n. 2 (5th Cir. 1996).

Morgan’s motion to compel was “an unauthorized motion which the district court was without jurisdiction to entertain.” United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of Morgan’s motion to compel and related discovery motion. See Brewster v. Dretke, 587 F.3d 764, 769 n. 3 (5th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 3368, 176 L.Ed.2d 1254 (2010).

AFFIRMED.