Samuel Dodson v. Nevada Department of Corrections;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SAMUEL DODSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-17264
D.C. No. 2:13-cv-00787-JCM-
VCF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Samuel Dodson, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s order denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) motion for
relief from judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction under
FILED
DEC 22 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of
a Rule 60(b) motion. Foley v. Biter, 793 F.3d 998, 1001 (9th Cir. 2015). We
affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Dodson’s motion
for relief because Dodson failed to show “extraordinary circumstances prevented
[him] from timely action to prevent or correct an erroneous judgment.”
Greenawalt v. Stewart, 105 F.3d 1268, 1273 (9th Cir. 1997) (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted).
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --