Whether a pro se prisoner can obtain a certificate of appealability to challenge the district court's denial of Rule 60(b) and Rule 59(e) post-conviction motions

No question identified. : D.Vt. 09-cr-90 Sessions, J. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 14" day of September, two thousand twenty-three. Present: ; Reena Raggi, Raymond J. Lohier, Jr., Susan L. Carney, Circuit Judges. Stephen Aguiar, v. 23-6443 23-6446 United States of America, It is hereby ORDERED that the proceeding docketed at 23-6446 is DISMISSED as duplicative. Appellant, pro se, moves for a certificate of appealability and in forma pauperis status to appeal the denials of his Rule 60(b) and 59(e) motions. He also moves to hold the appeal in abeyance or alternatively, for remand. Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the motions are DENIED and the appeal in 23-6443 is DISMISSED because Appellant has failed to show that “(1) jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court abused its discretion in denying the Rule 60(b) motion, and (2) jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the underlying habeas petition, in light of the grounds alleged to support the [Rule] 60(b) motion, states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right.” Kellogg v. Strack, 269 F.3d 100, 104 (2d Cir. 2001) (per curiam); see Jackson v. Albany Appeal Bureau Unit, 442 F.3d 51, 54 (2d Cir. 2006) (applying the Kellogg standard to Rule 59(e) motions). FOR THE COURT: ¢ Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court