Valenzuela v. City of San Francisco

Full title: Silvano L. VALENZUELA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO; et…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 13, 2001

21 F. App'x 761 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion

21 Fed.Appx. 761 (9th Cir. 2001) Silvano L. VALENZUELA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO; et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 00-15577. D.C. No. CV-98-00539-BZ. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. November 13, 2001

Submitted November 5, 2001. ^*

* The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Bernard Zimmerman, Magistrate Judge, Presiding. ^**

** The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge.

Before KLEINFELD, McKEOWN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^***

*** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Silvano L. Valenzuela appeals the district court's order denying his motion to set aside the order dismissing his civil rights complaint and denying his motion to set aside the order granting partial summary judgment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion the district court's denial of Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motions, Bateman v. United States Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1223 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

Page 762.

The district court held an evidentiary hearing, considered the appropriate equitable factors, and did not abuse its discretion by determining that Valenzuela failed to establish excusable neglect warranting relief from judgment. See id. at 1223-24.

AFFIRMED.