range. At the conclusion of the proceeding, the district judge told Garcia-Santos that he had a right to appeal his sentence.


13
Garcia-Santos took no appeal. However, approximately a year later, on August 3, 1999, he filed this § 2255 petition, attacking his conviction on numerous grounds. Judge Scheindlin denied his petition on the ground that in his plea agreement Garcia-Santos had expressly waived his right to appeal or petition under § 2255. Garcia-Santos then filed a motion to reconsider, which stated: "Petitioner will demonstrate that his attorney-at-law was ineffective, for he failed to inform him of the adverse consequences he faced if he signed the plea agreement," and "petitioner will demonstrate that he did not knowingly and willingly sign[] the plea agreement." On January 28, 2000, the District Courtthe aperture and is secured to the shell with an adhesive sealant such as Plastisol to complete the port. This design is less than optimal because the hexagonal central aperture, when subjected to high pressures, quickly develops fatigue cracking in its corners. In extreme cases, such fatigue cracking can eventually result in bursting since, during use, fuel is continually forced through the filter at high pressures and impose relatively high stress on the port.
Further, conventional port designs require two sealing points which often result in leakage problems in addition to the problems of bursting mentioned above. The first sealing point is disposed between the ferrule and the shell and is achieved by affixing the ferrule to the shell with the adhesive sealant. Such adhesives can eventually work loose,