Britton

MEMORANDUM *

The Britton Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s order denying their motion for relief from the judgment of dismissal entered two years earlier for failure to comply with case management orders in this multidistrict litigation. The Britton Plaintiffs argue that they are entitled to relief under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4) and 60(b)(6) because they did not *453 have notice of the relevant case management orders, the motion to dismiss, or the order of dismissal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

“Motions for relief from judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b)[ (6) ] are addressed to the sound discretion of the district court and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.” Casey v. Albertson’s Inc., 362 F.3d 1254, 1257 (9th Cir.2004). A motion brought pursuant to Rule 60(b)(4) on the ground that the district court’s order is void is reviewed de novo “because the question of the validity of a judgment is a legal one.” Export Group v. Reef Indus., Inc., 54 F.3d 1466, 1469 (9th Cir.1995).

A motion for relief from judgment for “any other reason” under Rule 60(b)(6), must be made within a “reasonable time.” Fed.R.Civ.P.…