Clarence L. Rhodes appeals the district courts orders affirming the magistrate judges order denying his motion for bond pending a decision on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition and denying reconsideration.
*
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Rhodes v. Dobbs, No. 1:20-cv-01725-JFA-SVH, 2006 WL 5671204 (D.S.C. Oct. 2, 2020). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE
. We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to the collateral order doctrine. See Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, 12, 72 S.Ct. 1, 96 L.Ed. 3 (1951); Pagan v. United States, 353 F.3d 1343, 1345-46 & n.4 (11th Cir. 2003).
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.