
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. David Patrick WORRELL, a/k/a David Issac Worrell, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 08-8300.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 7, 2009.
    Decided: June 5, 2009.
    David Patrick Worrell, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Ann Moore, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David Patrick Worrell seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motions for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2008) motion. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.2004). 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) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court debatable or wrong and any disposi-tive procedural ruling by the district court 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 Worrell 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.  