
    Michael Izell SEALS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Francisco JACQUEZ, Warden; Bill Lockyer, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 13-16930.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 18, 2015.
    
    Filed Nov. 23, 2015.
    Michael Izell Seals, Eureka, CA, pro se.
    
      Alisha Mae Carlile, Agca-Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.
    Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. 
        See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Michael Izell Seals appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Seals’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Seals filed pro se supplemental briefs on July 14 and 15, and August 19, 2015, which we have considered. No answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the briefing and record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses that the certified issue provides no basis for appellate relief, see Graves v. McEwen, 731 F.3d 876, 880-81 (9th Cir.2013), and we decline to expand the certificate of appealability to cover the uncertified issues identified in Seals’s pro se briefing. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); 9th Cir. R. 22-l(e); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir.1999) (per cu-riam).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

All other pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     