James Rudzavice appeals an order of July 18, 2012, denying his request for return of certain property that the government had confiscated in connection with its successful prosecution of Rudzavice for receipt of child pornography and transfer of obscene material to a minor. In the order in question, the district court carefully explained that all of the claimed property that was indeed in the government’s possession had been sent to Rudzavice’s sister, as requested, except for compact discs containing child pornography.

The district court’s order is supported by the record. To the extent that Rudza-vice, in his pro se brief and reply brief, seeks monetary compensation for property that he claims still has not been produced, the government correctly points out that Rudzavice has not satisfied the requirements of the applicable statutes and rules, even assuming, arguendo, there is property that has not been produced and that Rudzavice has adequately briefed that issue.

The order appealed from is AFFIRMED.