MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Leo Gonzales appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Gonzales contends that the Board’s 2005 decision to deny him parole was not *980 supported by “some evidence” and therefore violated his due process rights. This claim is not cognizable in federal habeas proceedings. See Swarthout v. Cooke, — U.S.-,-, 131 S.Ct. 859, 862-63, 178 L.Ed.2d 732 (2011) (per curiam).

Gonzales has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right with respect to his uncertified claims. We accordingly decline to certify them. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

AFFIRMED.