MEMORANDUM **

Benjamin Gibbs, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration in his action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), alleging constitutional violations in connection with a contraband search. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Gibbs’s motion for reconsideration because Gibbs failed to set forth any grounds for relief. See id. at 1262-63; see also Schikore v. BankAmerica Supplemental Retirement Plan, 269 F.3d 956, 961 (9th Cir. 2001) (“The mailbox rule provides that the proper and timely mailing of a document raises a rebuttable presumption that the document has been received by the addressee in the usual time. It is a settled feature of the federal common law.”).

Gibbs’s evidence regarding his outgoing mail, raised for the first time in his reply brief, is unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.