In Allen v. Siebert, 552 U.S. 3, 7, 128 S.Ct. 2, 4, 169 L.Ed.2d 329 (2007), the Supreme Court summarily reversed our judgment that Siebert's untimely motion had been properly filed under section 2244(d)(2). The Court held that "when a postconviction petition is untimely under state law, that is the end of the matter for purposes of 2244(d)(2)." Id. at 7, 128 S.Ct. at 4 (quoting Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 414, 125 S.Ct. 1807, 1812, 161 L.Ed.2d 669 (2005)) "Because Siebert's petition for state postconviction relief was rejected as untimely by the Alabama courts, it was not `properly filed' under 2244(d)(2)." Id.