[UNPUBLISHED]

Michael Carmie Antonelli appeals following the district court’s 1 dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition and denial of his motion for relief from judgment. We conclude that the dismissal of the section 2241 petition was proper for the reasons explained by the district court, see Abdullah v. Hedrick, 392 F.3d 957, 959 (8th Cir. 2004) (de novo standard of review), and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for relief from judgment, see Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 862 F.2d 161, 169-70 (8th Cir. 1988).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.