United States v. Lonneker Farms, Inc.

158 F. App'x 897
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided December 16, 2005·No. No. 05-35089·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Robert F. Lonneker appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion to vacate an earlier judgment as void. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s denial of a Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion. See Bateman v. United States Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1223 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

[898] The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Lonneker’s motion to vacate a judgment entered sixteen years earlier. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4)(motion must be filed within a reasonable time). Lonneker’s contention that there was insufficient evidence to support the judgment should have been raised in his prior appeal to this court. See United States v. Lonneker, 865 F.2d 265 (9th Cir.1988); see also Kesselring v. F/T Arctic Hero, 95 F.3d 23, 24 (9th Cir.1996) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Lonneker Farms, Inc., 158 F. App'x 897 (9th Cir. 2005).

158 F. App'x 897 (United States v. Lonneker Farms, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related