Elmer Seevers v. United States
Elmer R. SEEVERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Barry G. Silverman (author), Smith, Consuelo M. Callahan
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OCT 06 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS ELMER R. SEEVERS, No. 08-56680 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:05-cv-00481-J-BLM v. MEMORANDUM * UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; et al., Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Napoleon A. Jones, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 13, 2010 ** Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Elmer R. Seevers appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider the dismissal of his action alleging constitutional violations arising from injuries that he suffered while employed by the Department of the Navy. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Seevers’s motion for reconsideration because Seevers failed to establish any basis for reconsideration. See id. at 1263 (Rule 60(b) permits reconsideration only upon a showing of (1) mistake, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence; (3) fraud; (4) a void judgment; (5) a satisfied or discharged judgment; or (6) extraordinary circumstances that would justify relief).
Seevers’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 08-56680