Opinion
ORDER
ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.
On February 7, 2013, on review of plaintiff's third amended complaint, this case was dismissed for plaintiff's failure to state a claim. See ECF No. 18. Over three months later, plaintiff filed a motion to vacate the February 7, 2013 order. ECF No. 20. The court will construe this motion as one for relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).
Pursuant to Rule 60(b), a court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect" or for "any other reason that justifies relief." Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1), (6). "Motions for relief from judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) are addressed to the sound discretion of the district court." Casey v. Albertson's Inc., 362 F.3d 1254, 1257 (9th Cir. 2004).
In his one-page motion to vacate, plaintiff contends that he is without access to a law library and that he has yet to receive medical attention. Plaintiff, however, does not explain why access to a law library is necessary to present facts that are within his knowledge and that are necessary to state a claim. Additionally, plaintiff fails to demonstrate error in the court's order dismissing this case. The court will therefore deny plaintiff's motion to vacate.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's May 23, 2013 motion to vacate (ECF No. 18) is denied. Any further filings in this case will be disregarded.