¶1 Jamal A. Azeez seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2001), and denying his motion to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed the record, the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, and the district court’s order denying post judgment relief, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. * See Azeez v. Kirby, No. CA-98-523-5 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 28, 2000; Dec. 21, 2001). We deny Azeez’s motions for appointment of counsel and his motions to remand and to file a formal brief. 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.
¶2 DISMISSED.
¶3 We note that the district court should have considered the post judgment motion as under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), rather than Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), because the motion was executed within ten days of the entry of judgment. See Dove v. CODESCO, 569 F.2d 807, 809 (4th Cir.1978). We find, however, that relief was properly denied. See Collison v. International Chem. Workers Union, 34 F.3d 233, 236 (4th Cir.1994).