Douglas Meeks appeals the district court’s 1 order denying his request for a post-judgment sentence reduction. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Meeks’s request, see United States v. Whiting, 522 F.3d 845, 852-53 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review), because Meeks was sentenced before the enactment of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 and he received a statutory mandatory minimum sentence, see United States v. Sidney, 648 F.3d 904, 908 (8th Cir. 2011) (statutory mandatory mínimums have always trumped Guidelines, even where amended Guidelines would have otherwise called for shorter sentence); United States v. Orr, 636 F.3d 944, 957-58 (8th Cir. 2011) (Fair Sentencing Act did not apply retroactively to defendant who was sentenced before enactment of FSA to mandatory minimum sentence of life under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)).

Accordingly, we affirm. In addition, we deny Meeks’s motion to hold this appeal in abeyance.