criminal proceeding will extend the time for filing a notice of appeal if such motion is filed within the period allotted for filing a notice of appeal. See United States v. Dieter, 429 U.S. 6, 8-9, 97 S.Ct. 18, 19-20, 50 L.Ed.2d 8 (1976). Arrate-Rodriguez signed and filed a motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction on September 22, 2004. (R2-359). This far exceeded the time in which to file a notice of appeal from the denial on May 7, 2004, and, therefore, cannot serve to extend the time for filing an appeal of the district court’s order. Thus, we lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s denial of Arrate-Rodriguez’s motion for a reduction of his sentence. See United States v. Russo, 760 F.2d 1229, 1230 (11th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). Arrate-Rodriguez states in his brief that he
holding that notice of appeal did not divest the district court of jurisdiction at the time it was filed because a motion for reconsideration was pending holding that this court lacked jurisdiction to review a fed rcrimp 35 motion to reduce sentence because the notice of appealmotion for reconsideration was not timely filed holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to consider an argument not presented to the board in a motion for reconsideration holding trial court lacked jurisdiction to reduce defendants sentences and order his release from incarceration after notice of appeal was filed holding that notice of appeal was not effectively taken where appeal was filed simultaneously with timely motion for reconsideration because when timely motion for reconsideration is filed a notice of appeal filed prior to disposition of the motion to reconsider has no effect