
    Victor Angel TORRES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Kathleen GREEN; Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 16-6888
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 18, 2016
    Decided: October 21, 2016
    Victor Angel Torres, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Victor Angel Torres seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

By failing to challenge the district court’s dispositive holdings in his informal brief, Torres has waived his right to challenge the district court’s order. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Our independent review of the record nonetheless confirms the district court’s dispositive holdings. Accordingly, we deny Torres’ motion for 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED  