
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Nathaniel Dante RICE, Defendant—Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Nathaniel Dante Rice, Defendant—Appellant.
    Nos. 07-6020, 07-6178.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 25, 2007.
    Decided: June 1, 2007.
    Nathaniel Dante Rice, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Office of the United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Nathaniel Dante Rice seeks to appeal the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and denying his motions for reconsideration and an extension of time to file a Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion. The orders are 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 any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 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, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rice has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals. 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.  