ORDER

MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.

On March 28, 2016, this Court denied Sally D. Villaverde's pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus, and judgment was entered (ECF Nos. 70, 71).

Villaverde filed a notice of appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied him a certificate of appealability on August 26, 2016 (ECF No. 74). The United States Supreme Court denied his petition for writ of certiorari on May 2, 2017, and denied his petition for rehearing on October 5, 2017 (ECF Nos. 77, 79).

On December 14, 2017, Villaverde filed a motion for reconsideration in this Court, which this Court denied (ECF Nos. 80, 85). Villaverde filed a notice of appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (ECF No. 87). The Ninth Circuit has remanded this case for the limited purpose of granting or denying a certificate of appealability ("COA") (ECF No. 90). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), a COA may issue only when a petitioner "has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." With respect to claims rejected on the merits, the petitioner "must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (citing Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 & n.4 (1983)). For procedural rulings, a COA will issue only if reasonable jurists could debate (1) whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and (2) whether the court's procedural ruling was correct. Id. Reasonable jurists would not debate this Court's decision on Villaverde's motion for reconsideration.

It is therefore ordered that a certificate of appealability is denied.