Gomez v. Wilson et al

Filing 40

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motions for Reconsideration (filing nos. 35 and 39 ), liberally construed as Motions for Relief Under Rule 60(b), are denied. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MARTIN GOMEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
DENNIS WILSON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:12CV367

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motions for Reconsideration
(filing nos. 35 and 39), which the court liberally construes as motions for relief
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6).
On August 13, 2013, the court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint and entered
Judgment against him. (Filing Nos. 26 and 27.) Plaintiff appealed the Judgment and
the Eighth Circuit dismissed the appeal for failure to prosecute. (See Filing No. 37.)
Liberally construed, Plaintiff seeks relief from the court’s Judgment pursuant Fed. R.
Civ. P. 60(b). Rule 60(b)(6) “grants federal courts broad authority to relieve a party
from a final judgment ‘upon such terms as are just,’ provided that the motion is made
within a reasonable time and is not premised on one of the grounds for relief
enumerated in clauses (b)(1) through (b)(5).” Liljeberg v. Health Serv. Acquisition
Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 863 (1988). However, “[r]elief is available under Rule 60(b)(6)
only where exceptional circumstances have denied the moving party a full and fair
opportunity to litigate his claim and have prevented the moving party from receiving
adequate redress.” Harley v. Zoesch, 413 F.3d 866, 871 (8th Cir. 2005).
The court has carefully reviewed Plaintiff’s Motions. Plaintiff has not set forth
any “exceptional circumstances” that prevented him from fully litigating his claims
or receiving adequate redress. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motions for Reconsideration,

liberally construed as a Motions for Relief Under Rule 60(b), are denied.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff’s Motions for Reconsideration
(filing nos. 35 and 39), liberally construed as Motions for Relief Under Rule 60(b),
are denied.
DATED this 25th day of February, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/ John M. Gerrard
United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend,
approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on
their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties
or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
2