Whether a federal habeas petitioner can obtain relief under Rule 60(b) for alleged errors in a prior section 2254 proceeding

No question identified. : Case: 25-465, 04/01/2025, DktEntry: 18.1, Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F | L [= D FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT APR 12025 ROBERT S. PIERCE, No. 25-465 MUS COURTOPARPEALS we D.C. No. Petitioner Appellant, District of Montana Butte Vv. ORDER DEMETRIC GODFREY and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, Respondents Appellees. Before: CLIFTON and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges. This appeal is from the denial of appellant’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion. The request for a certificate of appealability (Docket Entry Nos. 16 and 17) is denied because appellant has not shown “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 section [2254 petition] states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right.” United States v. Winkles, 795 F.3d 1134, 1143 (9th Cir. 2015); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Martinez v. Shinn, 33 F.4th 1254, 1261 (9th Cir. 2022). Any pending motions are denied as moot. DENIED.