With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of appeals—which is to say, a motion to recall the mandate—is a ‘second or successive’ application for purposes of § 2244(b)____ Otherwise the statute would be ineffectual.”); McQueen v. Scroggy, 99 F.3d 1302, 1335 (6th Cir.1996) (“We agree with those circuits that have held that a Rule 60(b) motion is the practical equivalent of a successive habeas corpus petition____”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 2422, 138 L.Ed.2d 185 (1997); Felker v. Turpin, 101 F.3d 657, 661 (11th Cir.) (stating that “the established law of this circuit, like the decisions ... from other circuits, forecloses [the] position that Rule 60(b) motions are not constrained by successive petition rules.”); cert. denied, — U.S.-, 117 S.Ct. 451, 136 L.Ed.2d 346 (1996); Hunt v. Nuth, 57 F.3d 1327, 1339 (4th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1054, 116 S.Ct. 724,

A: holding that a certificate of appealability is unnecessary where a district court dismisses a rule 60b motion as an unauthorized successive habeas motion
B: holding that a rule 60b motion ordinarily should be treated as a successive habeas petition but declining to adopt a bright line rule equating all rule 60b motions with successive habeas petitions
C: holding that motion filed under fedrcivp 60b properly construed as successive  2255 motion
D: holding that district courts may properly treat rule 60b motions as successive habeas petitions
D.