Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-04565/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-04565-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:451 Employment Discrimination

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KENNETH R. KINNARD,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ROGERS TRUCKING, et al.,

Defendants /

No. C-99-4565 MMC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT; VACATING

HEARING

(Docket No. 377)

Before the Court is plaintiff Kenneth Kinnard’s (”Kinnard”) motion, filed January 24,

2007, to set aside the June 15, 2005 judgment in the above-titled action, pursuant to Rules

60(b)(3) and 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In essence, Kinnard

contends defense counsel Edwin Wilson conspired with Kinnard’s former counsel Frank

Debenedetto to thwart plaintiff in his prosecution of the instant action.

To the extent plaintiff brings his motion pursuant to Rule 60(b)(3), his motion is

untimely because it was made more than one year after judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

60(b) (providing Rule 60(b)(3) motion “shall be made . . . not more than one year after the

judgment . . . was entered”). 

To the extent plaintiff’s motion is brought under Rule 60(b)(6), the motion is untimely

because it was not “brought within a reasonable time.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). All of the

asserted court filings, and statements during court appearances, that provide the basis

Case 3:99-cv-04565-MMC Document 380 Filed 02/23/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

for the instant motion have been known to plaintiff since, at the latest, the fall of 2004, and

could have been brought to the Court’s attention even before judgment was entered. See,

e.g., Hamilton v. Newland, 374 F.3d 822, 825 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding relief under Rule

60(b)(6) available only “where extraordinary circumstances prevented him from taking

timely action to prevent or correct an erroneous judgment”) (internal quotation and citation

omitted). 

Moreover, plaintiff’s motion also fails on its merits, as the motion is entirely

unsupported by relevant evidence.

Accordingly, Kinnard’s motion to set aside the judgment is hereby DENIED. No

motion for reconsideration will be entertained.

This order terminates Docket No. 377.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:99-cv-04565-MMC Document 380 Filed 02/23/07 Page 2 of 2