WILLIAM J. MYERS, Jr. v. Leah Shay Freed

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WILLIAM J. MYERS, Jr.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
LEAH SHAY FREED,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 20-17120
D.C. No. 2:19-cv-05683-SMB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Susan M. Brnovich, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 17, 2021**
Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges.
William J. Myers, Jr. appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his motion to set aside the judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review for an abuse of a discretion. United States v. Estate of
Stonehill, 660 F.3d 415, 443 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.
* 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). Myers’s requests for oral
argument, set forth in the opening and reply briefs, are denied.
FILED
AUG 26 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-17120
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Myers’s motion for
relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d)(3) because Myers failed to
establish by clear and convincing evidence a fraud on the court. See id. at 443-45
(under Rule 60(d)(3) a party must establish fraud on the court by clear and
convincing evidence).
Defendant’s request for appellate attorney’s fees and costs, set forth in the
answering brief, is denied without prejudice. See Fed. R. App. P. 38 (requiring a
separate motion for fees and costs); Winterrowd v. Am. Gen. Annuity Ins. Co., 556
F.3d 815, 828 (9th Cir. 2009) (a request made in an appellate brief does not satisfy
Rule 38).
All pending motions (Docket Entry Nos. 17, 18, and 22) are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --