Marilyn Coulon v. Richard Fairbank ( 2020 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
JUL 21 2020
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARILYN COULON, No. 19-55116
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:17-cv-05340-FMO-
FFM
v.
RICHARD D. FAIRBANK, CEO of Capital MEMORANDUM*
One,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Fernando M. Olguin, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 14, 2020**
Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
Marilyn Coulon appeals pro se from the district court’s post-judgment order
denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion in her action alleging violations of
the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Sch.
*
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).
Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir.
1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Coulon’s post-
judgment Rule 60(b) motion because Coulon failed to demonstrate any basis for
relief. See id. at 1263 (grounds for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)); see
also Casey v. Albertson’s Inc., 362 F.3d 1254, 1257, 1260 (9th Cir. 2004) (to
prevail under Rule 60(b)(3), the “moving party must prove by clear and convincing
evidence” that judgment was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation, or other
misconduct that was not “discoverable by due diligence before or during the
proceedings” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Feature Realty, Inc.
v. City of Spokane, 331 F.3d 1082, 1093 (9th Cir. 2003) (three-part test to prevail
under Rule 60(b)(2)).
AFFIRMED.
2 19-55116