Douglas Alan Jarvis appeals the district court’s order denying his “Motion to Reconsider Transfer Order,” construed as a motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition as a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000) motion, and dismissing it without prejudice as successive. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Jarvis, Nos. CR-91-70 N; CA-91-235-2 (E.D.Va. Apr. 27, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.