Keyes v. Kauffman , 261 F. App'x 542 ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7214
DARNELL ALONZO KEYES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
RENA KAUFFMAN; PEARL VISION CENTER,
Incorporated,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:07-
cv-01149-JFM)
Submitted: January 17, 2008 Decided: January 24, 2008
Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darnell Alonzo Keyes, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Darnell Alonzo Keyes appeals the district court’s order
denying as untimely his motion for reconsideration of its order
dismissing his breach of contract action against Defendants. We
find that although the district court only considered the motion as
one filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), it should have been
construed instead as one filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) because
it was filed more than ten days after entry of judgment. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 59(e), 60; In re Burnley, 988 F.2d 1, 2-3 (4th Cir.
1992). Because Keyes’ motion failed to demonstrate any grounds
that would entitle him to relief pursuant to Rule 60(b), however,
we find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
dismissing the motion. See Heyman v. M.L. Mktg. Co., 116 F.3d 91,
94 (4th Cir. 1997) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we
affirm the district court’s order. See Keyes v. Kauffman, No.
1:07-cv-01149-JFM (D. Md. August 3, 2007). We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -