# Gregory Brown v. Richard Morgan

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · June 3, 2024

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9976492

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** June 3, 2024
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9976492

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that Rule 60(b)(6) “is to be utilized only where extraordinary circumstances prevented a party from taking timely action to prevent or correct an erroneous judgment” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)

## Opinion text

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2024
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GREGORY TYREE BROWN, No. 22-35884

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:16-cv-05975-BHS

v.
MEMORANDUM*
RICHARD L. MORGAN; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 29, 2024**

Before: FRIEDLAND, BENNETT, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.

Washington state prisoner Gregory Tyree Brown appeals pro se from the

district court’s order denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion to

vacate the judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Latshaw v. Trainer

*
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).
Wortham & Co., Inc., 452 F.3d 1097, 1100 (9th Cir. 2006). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Brown’s motion to

vacate the judgment because Brown failed to demonstrate he is entitled to such

relief. See id. at 1103 (explaining that Rule 60(b)(6) “is to be utilized only where

extraordinary circumstances prevented a party from taking timely action to prevent

or correct an erroneous judgment” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

All pending requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 22-35884

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9976492. Public record. Not legal advice.