Miller v. Pacific Micronesia Corp.

Good Law
31 F. App'x 481
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 1, 2002No. 01-16621; D.C. No. CV-99-00044-ARMCalifornia450 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Pacific Micronesia Corporation (“Dai-Ichi”) appeals from the decision of the district court granting the Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”), relief under Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the subsequent granting of an injunction against Dai-Ichi under 29 U.S.C. § 160 (j) (“§ 10(j) injunction”). Because the district court granted Rule 60(b)(6) relief based on grounds barred under the time limitation applicable to Rules 60(b)(2) & (3), we reverse the order granting Rule 60(b)(6) relief and thereby vacate the 10(j) injunction.

Motions for relief from a judgment under Rule 60(b) are reviewed for abuse of discretion. See American Ironworks & Erectors Inc. v. North American Constr. Corp., 248 F.3d 892 , 899 (9th Cir.2001).

The bases of the NLRB’s motion for Rule 60(b) relief were fraud and newly discovered evidence, consisting of false testimony given at the original administrative hearing. Fraud and newly discovered evidence are bases for relief under Rule 60(b)(2) & (3). In this case, though, 60(b)(2) or (3) relief was unavailable to the NLRB because it failed to bring its motion within the one year limitation…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.