Roshan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 PEYMAN ROSHAN, Case No. 20-cv-04770-AGT

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

v. RULE 60(b) MOTION

MELANIE J. LAWRENCE, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 46 Defendants.

14 Plaintiff Peyman Roshan moves for relief from judgment under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(b)(2) and (b)(3) based on alleged newly discovered evidence and fraud/misconduct by defendants. Dkt. 46; see also Dkt. 35 (judgment). The parties’ familiarity with the record, including the Court’s orders dismissing this case on Younger abstention grounds and denying Roshan’s motion for reconsideration (Dkts. 34 & 43), is assumed. Relief from judgment is denied.1 “Rule 60(b) allows a party to seek relief from a final judgment, and request reopening of his case, under a limited set of circumstances.” Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 528 (2005). Relevant here, Rule 60(b)(2) permits relief from judgment based on “newly discovered evidence,” 24 1 Roshan filed the…