Opinion
5:01-CR-10 (WDO).
April 18, 2007
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner's motion captioned as a "Rule 60(b)" motion but is in reality a second motion to reconsider the Court's adoption of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation that resulted in the denial of Petitioner's habeas petition. As thoroughly explained in the Recommendation and the Court's last order, Petitioner's motion attacking his sentence was untimely filed, and Petitioner presented no evidence or argument in support of tolling that time period. The record shows that Petitioner was not diligent in filing his petition even after he learned of the time limitation. Petitioner's second motion for reconsideration is therefore DENIED.
SO ORDERED.