United States of America v. EILEEN McGREW

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
EILEEN McGREW,
Defendant-Appellant,
and
CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX
BOARD; PHH MORTGAGE
CORPORATION,
Defendants.
No. 17-55393
D.C. No. 2:14-cv-02647-R-AS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
* 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).
FILED
MAR 27 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-55393
Eileen McGrew appeals from the district court’s order denying her post-
judgment motion for reconsideration in the government’s action to foreclose
federal tax liens on real property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
We review for an abuse of discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v.
ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying McGrew’s motion
for relief from judgment because the motion was filed more than one year after
entry of judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1); Nevitt v. United States, 886 F.2d
1187, 1188 (9th Cir. 1989) (“A motion for relief from judgment based on
[Rule 60(b)(1), (2), or (3)] shall be made not more than one year after the
judgment, order, or proceeding was entered or taken.” (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted)).
We reject as meritless McGrew’s contention that the district court should
have construed her motion for reconsideration as seeking relief under Rule
60(b)(6).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --