Ord
Ord v. United States
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff-Appellant Edward O.C. Ord, Esq. (“Ord”) appeals the dismissal of his action. We have jurisdiction and AFFIRM.
First, the district court did not have jurisdiction to consider Ord’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion for relief from the order (“April Order”) issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (“DC district court”). Rule 60(b) motions may be filed in either the district court which issued the *854 judgment or order, or in a district court located in a district where the judgment or order has been registered for enforcement. F .D.I.C. v. Aaronian, 93 F.3d 636, 639 (9th Cir.1996). The April Order has not been registered for enforcement in the Northern District of California.
Second, the district court properly dismissed Ord’s independent action to set aside the April Order. We are reluctant to allow independent actions for relief from other courts’ judgments or orders because of “considerations of comity and orderly administration of justice.” Lapin v. Shulton, Inc., 333 F.2d 169, 172 (9th Cir.1964).
Treadaway v. Acad. of Motion Picture Arts & Seis., 783 F.2d 1418 , 1422 (9th Cir.1986).