Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that thi s opinion should not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 40923 Su m m ar y Cal endar

CA RLP EA CO CK P l a i n tiff-A p p ell a n t v. J .A .M . D IS T R IB U T IN G , IN C

. D efen da n t
- A pp el l ee

A p p ea lf

rom the U n i tedS tates D i stri ct C ou rt f o rt he Eas t e r n Di s t r i c to f Te xa s , Bea um o ntD ivi s i o n U SD C N o. 9: 08- c v- 00229

B ef ore B E N AV ID E S , P R A D O , an d S O U T H W IC K , C i rcui tJu dg es . P E R C U R IA M: * A pp el l an tC arlP eacock ap pea l s f rom an order denyi ng hi s m o t i on f or r el i ef f r o m j u d g me n t
. F i n d i n gn o a b u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n , w e a f

f i r m. A p p e lla n t b r o u g h t s u it c la im in gd is c r im in a tio n b a s e do n ra c e . H is s u it
w as di sm i ssed by the di st ri ctcourtpu rsuan tt o F ed. R
. C iv. P
. 1 2(b) ( 6) on A u gu st 2 5 , 2 0 0 9 , b eca u se t h e suit w a s n ot ti m ely fil ed w i th i n th e st a tu to r ylim i t. Th er eaf t er , on Au gust28, Peacock f i l ed hi s “ m ot i on t o r ec ons i der” w hi c h w as United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Februar y 8, 2010 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk Case: 09-40923 Document: 00511022542 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/08/2010N o. 09- 40923

2 p r o p e r l yc h a r a c t e r i z e da s amo t i o n f o r r e l i e f f

r o m j u d g m e n tp u r s u a n tt o F e d
. R. Ci v. P. 60(b)

. Pe ac o c k’ s m o t i o n, ho w e ve r , di d no tr ai s e a ny ne w g r o unds concerni n g t h e st atute of l i m i t ati on s i ssues w h i ch w ere t h e basi s f or t h e A u gu st 25 di sm i ss al
. The “ m ot i on t o r ec ons i der” w as deni ed o n S ep tem b er8, 2009. Pea c o c k’ s no t i c e o f ap pe al s pe c i f i c al l y and o nl y r e fe r e nc e s an ap pe al f rom t he S ep tem b er 8 , 20 0 9 ord er d en yin g h i s m oti on f or re lie f from j u d gm en t. A c c or di ngl y, t he i ss ue w hi c h t hi s C our tc an r ev i ew i s t he Sept em ber8, 2009
o r de r . W e hav e no j ur i s di c t i o n t o r e vi e w t he m e r i t s o f t he und e r l yi ng j udg m e nt
or a n y o th er jud gm en t or i ssu es sa ve the ru l i n g o n P ea cock ’ s m oti on to
r e c o n s id e r . Pop ev . MCI Te le c o m m . Cor

p. , 9 3 7 F .2 d2 5 8 , 2 6 6 (5 th C ir . 1 9 9 1 ). Peaco c k’ s br i ef

on appe ali s al m os tentir ely devot ed t o hi s as se r t i on t hat h e h a s su ff

ere dd i scrim i n a ti on a t th e h a n d s of A p p ell ee a n dre l a tes to the m erits of the j udgm entof

A ugust25, 2009, w hi c h i s notbef or e us. T o t he e xt entt hat P e a c o c k ’ s p r o s e b r ie f, w h ic h w e lib e r a llyco n s tr u e , su g g e s ts th a t a p r e v io u s s u it i n volvi n g t h e sam e cl ai m w h i ch w as di sm iss ed w i t h ou tprej u di ce f or w an tof p r o s e c u tio n , to lle d t h e lim ita tio n s p e r io do ru n d e r m in e s th e o r d e rd e n y in gh is
m oti on t o r ec onsi d er, su ch arg u m en ts are u n a va i l i n g. T h i s tol l i n g a rg u m en t w as
n ot m a d e in th e m oti on to recon sideran d , i n a n y ev en t, a ti m ely fil ed T i tl e V II
s ui tdi s m i s s e d f

o rw antof

pr o s e c ut i o n doe s nott o l lt he 9 0- da y l i m i t at i o ns pe r i o d. P r i c ev . D igi t alEqui pm e ntCor

p. , 8 46 F. 2d1 02 6, 1 02 7 ( 5t h Ci r . 1 98 8) (c i t i ng T ay lo rv . B u ngeCo r

p ., 77 5 F .2d 6 1 7 , 618 ( 5th C i r. 198 5) )

. Pea cock ha s not show n an y shortc om i n gs i n t h e order appea l ed f rom an d cert ai n l y n o ab u se of d i s c r e t i o n. Th e o r d e rd e ny i ngt he m o t i o n t o re c ons i d e ru nd e rFe d
. R. Civ . P. 60 (b) r e l i e f

i s AFF I RM ED , a nd t he r e f o r e t he j udg m e nti s al s o AF FI RM ED
. Any and al lot herreli ef

w het herreque st ed by A ppel l antor A ppel l ee i s deni ed, s ave for t h e cos t on ap p ea l , w h i ch the C l erk i s to ass ess ag a i n st A p p ell a n t. Case: 09-40923 Document: 00511022542 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/08/2010