Dictado

MEMORANDUM *

Fortunato L. Dictado seeks review of two issues, the second of which is uncertified. First, Dictado appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to amend his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition to assert a new claim. The district court held that the amendment was time-barred because it did not relate back to the original petition. *863 Second, Dictado appeals the district court’s denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2258 (c)(1)(A), and we affirm.

Regarding the certified issue, at oral argument, Dictado conceded that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Mayle v. Felix 1 foreclosed his argument that the new claim related back to the original petition. Dictado forfeited any entitlement he may have had to argue his eligibility for equitable tolling on the new claim by failing to raise the issue before the district court.

Regarding the uncertified issue, we grant the certificate of appealability, but deny the claim on the merits. The state court neither unreasonably applied clearly established Supreme Court precedent when it denied Dictado’s claim nor unreasonably determined the facts in light of the evidence…