
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Elvin FLORIS, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 03-7701.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 10, 2004.
    Decided June 16, 2004.
    Elvin Floris, Appellant pro se. John Stuart Bruce, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,'Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Elvin Floris seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration filed under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Floris was seeking reconsideration of an order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as second or successive. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Floris has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED  