of those cases and sentenced to prison. 2 . The judge construed Brogan’s Rule 60(b) motion as a second or successive 2255 motion, declined to transfer it to this court, and dismissed it. That decision may have been improper, but "because the controlling constitutional claim that trial counsel was ineffective is now properly before this court,” Brogan has chosen not to press the issue. Aplt. Opening Br. & Request for COA at 10 n. 3. 3 . Brogan does not challenge the district judge’s decision finding him not credible and determining his counsel would have investigated the inclusion of check 30878 if the problem has been brought to counsel’s attention. Any disputes with these aspects of the judge’s decision are waived. See United States v. Wayne, 591 F.3d 1326, 1334 n. 6 (10th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). His argument here is that even without
holding an argument not raised in opening brief is waived holding argument waived for failure to raise it in opening brief holding that appellant waived issue by failing to raise it in opening brief holding an argument made in plaintiffs reply brief but not in their opening brief waived holding that argument not raised in opening brief is waived