Park
Park v. Social Security Administration
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WARING PARK, Plaintiff, No. C 18-06603 WHA
v.
ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of the ORDER ON MOTION TO VACATE Social Security Administration, et al., AND REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS 14 Defendants.
16 The Court liberally construes plaintiff’s letter dated January 2 (Dkt. No. 33) as a Rule 60 17 motion to vacate judgment and a request for documents. A Rule 60(a) motion is for correction 18 of clerical mistakes in an order. Plaintiff alleges no such errors. A Rule 60(b) motion permits 19 relief from judgment where “appropriate to accomplish justice,” in cases such as a party’s 20 excusable neglect, opposing party’s misconduct, discovery of new evidence, lack of subject- 21 matter jurisdiction, or other “extraordinary circumstances.” See Henson v. Fidelity Nat’l Fin., 22 943 F.3d 434, 443 (9th Cir. 2019). Plaintiff’s motion is an extensive disagreement with the 23 order of dismissal (Dkt. No. 25). The undersigned appreciates plaintiff’s candor, but notes 24 plaintiff does not point to specific errors of law, new material…