Simmons #063313 v. Brewer

Filing 46

ORDER - The judgment from which relief is sought was entered over four years ago. The Magistrate Judge concluded that it was untimely under both Rule 60(b)(1) and 60(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P. Plaintiff fails to demonstrate how his motion could be cons trued as timely under the relevant Rule 60 standards. Accordingly, we accept the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 45 ). It is therefore ORDERED DENYING Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment. (Doc. 41 ). Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J Martone on 1/8/18. (LAD)

1

WO

2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

6
7

Lamar Simmons,
Petitioner,

8
9

vs.

10
Charles L. Ryan et al.,
11
Respondents.
12

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 12-01148-PHX-FJM
ORDER

13
14

The court has before it Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment (Doc. 41), the

15

Respondents’ Response (Doc. 44), and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation

16

(Doc. 45), to which no objections have been filed.

17

The judgment from which relief is sought was entered over four years ago. The Magistrate

18

Judge concluded that it was untimely under both Rule 60(b)(1) and 60(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P.

19

Plaintiff fails to demonstrate how his motion could be construed as timely under the relevant

20

Rule 60 standards. Accordingly, we accept the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

21

(Doc. 45).

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

It is therefore ORDERED DENYING Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment. (Doc.
41).
DATED this 8th day of January, 2018.