ORDER DECLINING TO ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, District Judge.

In December 2016, this Court sentenced Defendant Jared Lockwood in connection with his pleas of guilty to charges of manufacturing an unregistered destructive device and making a false declaration before a federal court. (See Judgment, ECF No. 16.) On January 18, 2018, Lockwood filed a motion to vacate his conviction and sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (See Mot., ECF No. 21). The motion plainly lacked merit, and the Court denied it. (See Order, ECF No. 24.) The Court later denied Lockwood's motion for a certificate of appealabilty related to that decision. (See Order, ECF No. 31.)

On May 14, 2019, Lockwood filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's January 25, 2018, order pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (See Mot., ECF No. 32.) Lockwood also filed a motion for discovery. (See Mot., ECF No. 33.) The Court denied both motions in a written order dated June 28, 2019. (See Order, ECF No. 34.) Lockwood has now filed an appeal of that order. (See Notice of Appeal, ECF No. 35.)

In the Court's June 28, 2019, order, it did not address whether Lockwood was entitled to a certificate of appealability with respect to the Court's ruling. The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Lockwood is not entitled to a certificate of appealability. Lockwood has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Moreover, reasonable jurists could not debate the correctness of the Court's denial of Lockwood's motions for reconsideration under Rule 60(b) and discovery, and the issues raised by Lockwood do not deserve encouragement to proceed further. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000) (setting forth standards for granting a certificate of appealability).

Accordingly, the Court DECLINES to issue Lockwood a certificate of appealability related to the Court's June 28, 2019, order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.