Cormier v. Williams

Full title: Ian Lamonte CORMIER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lynn WILLIAMS, Correctional…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 20, 2000

243 F.3d 547 (9th Cir. 2000)

Opinion

243 F.3d 547 (9th Cir. 2000) Ian Lamonte CORMIER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lynn WILLIAMS, Correctional Officer; Kenneth Selph; J. Perry; L.C. Perez; S. Estradas; E.D. Jennings; Rudy Peralez; J.M. Mattingly; A. Godfrey; P.E. Tingey; G.E. Harris; Gary Lindsey, Warden; David Tristan, Deputy Director; John Martinez; F.O. Chavez, Defendants-Appellees. No. 00-15049. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit November 20, 2000

Submitted November 6, 2000. ²

2 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

D.C. No. CV-98-01542-FMS

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California William H. Alsup, District Judge, Presiding.

Before FARRIS, REINHARDT, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ¹

1 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Ian Lamonte Cormier, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order denying his motion to vacate summary judgment for prison officials in Cormier's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We lack jurisdiction to address Cormier's contentions regarding the merits of the district court's original entry of judgment for prison officials because Cormier both failed to file a notice of appeal within 30 days of entry of final judgment and failed to file a timely post-judgment tolling motion. See Fed. R.App. P. 4. Accordingly, by order dated February 17, 2000, the scope of Cormier's appeal was limited to denial of his motion to vacate.

We review an order denying a Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion to vacate judgment for abuse of discretion. See School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir.1993). Because Cormier failed to demonstrate mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect, newly discovered evidence, or any other basis for relief from judgment, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying his motion to vacate. See id. at 1262-63.

Cormier's remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED.