ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO ENTERTAIN AND GRANT RULE 60(B) MOTION; DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Re: Dkt. No. 262

MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge.

On March 1, 2019, the Court issued its "Order Denying Defendant's Fifth Motion for Reconsideration of Denial of Petition for Writ of Coram Nobis; Denying Issuance of Certificate of Appealability." On March 8, 2019, defendant filed a notice of appeal from said order; the appeal remains pending before the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The Court is now in receipt of defendant's "Motion for the District Court to `Entertain and Grant' an Amended Rule 60(b) Motion Pursuant to a Prospective Remand From Ninth Circuit #19-15437," filed May 3, 2019. In said motion, defendant requests that the Court indicate whether it would grant an amended version of his fifth motion for reconsideration, i.e., the motion that was denied on March 1, 2019. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1 (setting forth procedure where "timely motion is made for relief that the court lacks authority to grant because of an appeal that has been docketed").

The Court having read and considered defendant's latest motion, the motion is hereby DENIED, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1(a)(2), for the reason that the proposed amended fifth motion for reconsideration is untimely and futile, as it only raises arguments that repeatedly have been addressed and rejected by both this Court and by the Ninth Circuit.

Lastly, if defendant elects to appeal the instant order, the Court, to the extent a certificate of appealability may be required, hereby DENIES such certificate, as defendant has not made any showing, let alone a "substantial showing," that he has been denied a "constitutional right." See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

IT IS SO ORDERED.