Saahdi Coleman v. Derral Adams

MEMORANDUM

In 2007, Saadhi Coleman filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , which the district court dismissed as untimely. Years later, Coleman unsuccessfully sought relief from this dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Coleman now challenges the district court’s denial of his Rule 60(b) motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2258, and we affirm.

A district court’s denial of a motion under Rule 60(b) is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See Casey v. Albertson’s Inc., 362 F.3d 1254, 1257 (9th Cir. 2004). In relevant part, Rule 60(b) provides that a court may relieve a party from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for “fraud ... misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3), or for “any other reason that justifies relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6). As to timing, “[a] motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time— and for reasons [under subdivisions] (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1).

The timeliness of Coleman’s motion turns on whether he sought relief from the district court under Rule…