Barcume

MEMORANDUM **

*755 Rollie Barcume appeals two of the district court’s orders in an action for breach of contract. Barcume alleged that David and Melinda Bowles reneged on three agreements concerning the purchase and lease of real property. He obtained a default judgment against the Bowleses, which the district court later vacated pursuant to Fed.R.CivJP. 60(b)(1) (“Rule 60(b)(1)”) and 60(b)(4). The district court then issued an order to show cause asking Barcume to explain why the case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The court ultimately dismissed the action, concluding that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction because Barcume did not satisfy 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (a)’s amount in controversy requirement. Barcume now appeals the district court’s orders vacating the default judgment and dismissing the action against the Bowleses.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the order vacating the default judgment, but reverse the order dismissing the action.

I. Order Vacating the Default Judgment

We review a district court’s ruling on a motion to vacate a judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b)(1) for an abuse of discretion. TCI Group Life Ins. Plan…