FI LED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEV ENT H CI RCUI T FEB 8, 2 011 J OHN LEY CLERK [DO N OT PUBLISH]
IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 13 31 2 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 1 :0 9- cv -0 20 19 -TCB ALEXAND ER HARVIN,
Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t,
ve rs us HEALTH CARE FUNDING SOLUTIONS, TRAUNER, COHEN & THO MAS, GORDON C. TOMLINSON, MIC HAEL COHEN , Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ees ,

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Feb ru ary 8, 2 01 1) Befo re HULL, MARTIN, andANDERSON, Circu itJu dg es .PER CURI AM:

Alex an de r Harv in , pro ceed in g p ro se, app eal s t he di stric t co urt’s o rd er de nyin g h is Fed . R. Civ . P. 60 (b ) m ot io n t o re in st at e h is act io n a ga in stHeal th care Fu nd in g S ol ut io ns (“ HFS”); Traune r, Co he n & Tho m as ; Go rd onC. Tom li ns on ; an d M ic ha el Co he n (“ de fen da nt s” ). Harv in su edde fen da nt s fo r vi ol at in g t he Fai r Deb t Co ll ect io n P ract ic es Act (“ FDCPA”) , 15 U.S.C. § 1 69 2, an d t he Geor gi a Fai r Bu si ne ss Prac ti ces Act, O.C.G.A. § 1 0- 1- 39 1, et . seq . Afte r th e p art ie s ag reedto
se tt le , Harv in vo lu nt ari ly dis m is se d h is cas e b efo re the di st ric t co urt. See Fed . R. Ci v. P. 4 1( a)(1 )(A)(i i). The pa rti es st ip ul at edth atth e d is mis sa l was with pr ejud ic e. Harv inlat er as ke d t he di stric t co urt t o re in st at e h is cas e, al le gi ng th at HFS fraudul en tl y

in du cedhi m

to set tl e. The di stric t co urt d en ie d Harvi n’s m ot io n. Harv in fil eda m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n, wh ic h t he di st ric t co urt al so de ni ed
. Afte r th or ou ghrev ie w, we affi rm . W e rev ie w a di st ric t co urt’s d en ia l o f a Ru le 60 (b ) m ot io n fo r ab us e o f di sc ret io n. Fre de ric k v . Kirb y Tank sh ip s, In c. 20 5 F .3d12 77 , 12 87 (11 th Cir
. 20 00 ). Ru le 60 (b ) al lo ws co urts to “ rel ie ve a party . . . from a fi na l ju dg m en t” for
m ul ti pl e rea so ns , in cl ud in g “ frau d . . ., m is rep res en ta ti on , or m is co nduc t b y an op po si ng pa rty.” Fed. R. Ci v. P. 6 0( b) (3 ). Rel ie f un de r Ru le 60 (b )(3 ) requi res cl ear a ndco nv in ci ng ev id en ce tha t: (1) “ th e adve rs e p arty ob ta in edth e v erd ic t 2th ro ug h fr au d, m is rep res en ta ti on , or o th er m is co nduc t” an d (2 ) “ th e co nduc t

pr ev en te d [t he m ov in g p arty ] fro m ful ly pres en ti ng hi s ca se .” W ad de ll v. Hen dry Cn ty. Sh eri ff’s Offi ce, 3 29 F.3d13 00 , 13 09 (11 th Cir . 20 03 ). Harv in arg ue s t ha t h e is en ti tl edto rel ie f un de r Ru le 60 (b )(3 ) be cau se HFS in du cedhi m

to set tl e th ro ug h fr au d o r m is rep res en ta ti on s. Sp eci fic al ly, he arg ue s th atHFS rep res en te d t ha t, as a co nd it io n o f th e se tt le m en t, i t wo ul d a ska cred it bu reauto de le te in fo rm at io n abo utanall eg edou ts ta nd in g d eb t t ie d t o asp eci fic
acco un t fr om

Harv in ’s cred itrep ort. Harv in cla im s tha t HFS t he n i nt en ti on al ly li st edth e wro ng acco un t n um be r in th e se tt le m en t ag reem en t. Ho wev er,

“ co nc lu so ry

av erm en ts of . . . frau d m ad e o n i nf orm at io n a ndbe li ef an d
un acco m pa ni edby a sta te m en t o f cl ear andco nv in ci ng pro ba ti ve fact s wh ic h
supp ort s uc h b el ie f do no t s erv e to rai se th e is su e o f th e ex is te nc e o f frau d.” Bo ok er v . Dug ge r, 82 5 F .2d28 1, 2 83 (11 th Cir . 19 87 ) (quo ta ti on m ark s o m it te d)
. The di stric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g Harvi n’s Ru le 60 (b ) m ot io n. Harv in off eredm ere c on cl us ory

all eg at io ns th atHFS en ga ge d i n frau d. HFS p ur ch as edtwo acco un ts on whi chHarv in all eg ed ly owedm on ey , and th e acc ou ntnu m

be r itin se rte d i n t he set tl em en t ag reem en t co rres po nd edto on e o f th os e acc ou nt s. Harv in ’s com pl ai ntals o re ferr edto bo th acco un t n um be rs . As the di st ric t co urt n ot ed , th e err orco ul d h av e b eena m ere o ve rs ig ht
. HFS d idno t 3co nc eal th e co nt en ts of t he set tl em en t ag reem en t fr om Harv in . Rath er, the erro r was pre se ntinth e fi na l v ers io n o f th e se tt le m en t ag reem en t tha t Harvi n s ig ne d. Harv in pro vi de d n o e vi de nc e th athe was d ep riv edof ach an ce t o re vi ew th e ag reem en t b efo re s ig ni ng it . W e th us co nc lu de th atHarv in fai le d t o p ro vi de cle ar an d c on vi nc in g e vi de nc e th atHFS en ga ge d i n fr au d o r m ad e m at eri al
m is rep res en ta ti on s t o i nduc e h im to set tl e. AFFIR MED.

4