The a pp el l ee noti fi ed thi s co urt that he was not ser ved w i th pro cess i n the dist ri ct * co ur t an d woul d no t be fi l i nga b r i efo r pa r ti ci pat i ngi n thi s appe al . Afte r e xa m i ni ngthe appe l l an t' s br i efa nd the r ec o r d, we ha ve c o nc l ude d tha t o r ala r g um en t i s unne ce ss ar y . T he ap p ea l is su b m itt ed on th e a p p ella n t's br ief a n d th e re c or d . See F ED . R. A PP . P. 34(a)(2) . NONP RE C E DE NT I AL DI S PO S I T I ON To b e ci te d o nl yi n a cc o r dan ce wi th Fe d . R. A p p . P. 32 .1 

# United States Court of App eals

F or the Se ven th C ir cu it Ch i cago ,I l l i nois 6 0604 Subm i tte d A ugust 1 8, 20 09 * Deci ded A ugust 1 8, 20 09

B efo re A N N C L A IR E W IL L IA M S, Cir cu i tJudg e D IA N E S. SY K E S, Cir cu i tJudg e JO H N D A N IE L T IN D E R, Cir cu i tJudg e N o. 08- 4207 DAVI D W. NAI L, P et it ioner-App el lant, v. B I L L K. WI L S O N, R espo nd ent-A pp ellee . A p p eal from the U nited States D istri ct C ou rt f orthe N or ther n Dis tr i ct o fInd i ana, S outh Ben d Di vi si o n . No . 3 : 0 8
- CV
- 4 0 0
- W CL W illiam C . L ee , Judg e . O R D E R Davi d N ai l, an Ind i ana pri sone r, fi l ed a pet i ti on under 2 8 U.S . C. § 2 254 chal l engi ng a p ris on d isc ip lin ar y d ec isio n . T h e d ist ric t c ou rtd en ied th e p et itio n on th e m er its . N ail d idN o. 08
- 4207 Page 2

n otap p ea l th at d ec isio n, bu t filed tw o p os tju d gm en t m ot ion s, th e firs t o f w h ich sim p ly re hashes the m er i ts ofhi s peti ti on f orhabea s co rpus. That postj ud gm ent m oti on was fi l ed m or e than ten days a fterentry o fj ud gm ent, so the dist ri ct c ourtdecl i ned to const rue i t a s a m ot ion for re c on sid er at ion u n d er Fe d er al R u le of C ivil P ro c ed u re 59 (e). Se eEas l ey v . K irm sey, 382 F.3d 693 , 696 n.2 (7th C ir. 2004); Ta lano v. Nw . M ed. Faculty Found . , Inc. , 27 3 F . 3d 757, 76 2 ( 7th Ci r. 20 01) . The c ourti nstea d charac ter i zed the m oti on a s a n unauthori zed su c c es siv e c olla te ra l at ta c k a n d d ism iss ed it for la c k of s u bj ec t-m at te r j u ris d ict ion . See G onz alez v. Crosby, 545 U . S. 524, 530-31 (2005 ); Col l i ns v. Hol i nka , 510 F.3d 666 , 667 (7th C ir. 2 0 0 7 ) . T h e c o u r t ’ s r u l i n gp r o mp t e d N a i lt o fi l e h i s s e c o n d p o s tj u d g me n tmo t i o n, th i s t i me ar gu in g t h at th e d ist ric t c ou rtsh ou ld h av e c on st ru ed th e p re vio u s s u b m iss ion as a tim ely Rule 59 m oti on be cause, N ai l sa ys, he was unabl e t o fi l e i t s oo ner du e t o an unexpected change i n the pri son’ s photo copyi ng pol i cy. But N ai l ’ s s eco nd m oti on was fi l ed m or e than ten days afterhi s fi rs t was deni ed, and so the dist ri ct c ourtco nstr ued i t a s a m oti on under Feder alRule o fCi vi l Pro cedure 60(b) . The c ourtdeni ed i t. W e a l re ady have i ssued a j uri sdic ti onalr uling i n thi s a pp eall i m i ti ng o ur r evi ew to th e o rd er d en yin g N ail’s se c on d p os tju d gm en t m ot ion . Se eNai l v. Wi l s on , N o. 08
- 4207( 7th Cir . M ar . 17, 20 09) ( unp ubl i shed or der) . In that rul i ng we concl ud ed that N ai l ’ s no ti ce o f a p p e a l i s u n t i me l y wi th r e s p e c tt o th e d i s t r i c tc o u r t ’ s o th e r o r d e r s . Na i la r g u e s th a twe sh ou ld rescind the j urisd ictional ruling and also review the m erits ofthe d istri ct cou rt’s fi r stt wo o r der s, b utwe se e no r ea so n t o r ev i si t o urde ci si o n. A s t o th e d en ial of N ail’s se c on d p os tju d gm en t m ot ion, th e d ist ric t c ou rt ’s a n aly sis is correct. Th e secon d m otion p oints ou t a pe rceived flaw i n th e d istri ct cou rt’s chara cter i zati on o fN ai l ’ s fi rs t pos tj ud gm ent m oti on a s a succe ssi ve peti ti on f orhabea s cor pu s, but si nce the se cond m oti on was notfi l ed unti lm or e than ten days a fterentry o f th e o rd er d ism iss in g t h e firs t, it c an n otbe an yt h in g b u t a m ot ion u n d er R u le 6 0(b ). See E a sley, 3 82 F . 3d at6 96 n. 2. In the s ec o nd mot i o n Nai la r g ue s th atthe t en - dayl i m i t f o r fi l i ng a R u le 5 9 m ot ion sh ou ld h av e b ee n ex c u se d be c au se h is m ot ion w as lat e d u e t o a ch an ge in p rison p oli cy an d throu gh no fault of his ow n. T ha t argu m en t is not ap p rop riate f or a m ot ion u n d er R u le 6 0(b ). SeeStoll erv. Pu reFis hing Inc. , 528 F.3d 478 , 480 (7th C ir. 2008); Bell v. E a stm a n K o da kC o ., 21 4 F .3d 79 8, 80 1 (7 th C ir. 20 00 ); Ne ub e rg v . M i ch ae l Re e s eHos p. Fo und . , 12 3 F . 3d 95 1, 9 55 ( 7th Ci r . 1 99 7) . And a t al le ve nt s, di st r i ctc o ur ts l ac kthe po wert o e xt en d th e t im e fo r filin g a R u le 5 9 m ot ion, reg ar d les s o f th e c irc u m st an c es . See F ED . R. C IV . P. 6(b )(2) ; Talan o , 273 F.3d at76 1; Ho pe v . U nited Sta tes , 43 F .3d 11 40 , 114 3 (7 th C ir. 19 94 ). N ai l has al so fi l ed w hat he cal l s a “M oti on t o A dd end [s i c] A pp ealBri ef” in w hi ch he i ntro du ces a new argum ent. He see ks to ar gue that hi s fi rs t pos tj ud gm ent m oti on was actual l y fi l ed w i thi n the ten- day per i od f orfi l i ng a Rule 59( e) m oti on. He base s that ar gum ent o n hi s m i sta ken b el i efthatthe ten- day per i od beg an wh en he re cei ved a copy o fN o. 08
- 4207 Page 3

th e d ist ric t c ou rt ’s o rd er . H ow ev er , th e t en -d ay p er iod ru n s fro m th e e n tr y of ju d gm en t. SeeO br ie cht v. R aem is ch , 517F.3d 48 9, 49 3 (7 th C ir. 20 08 ); Borre r o v. Ci ty of Chi cago , 45 6 F . 3d 698, 70 1 ( 7th Ci r. 20 06) . The date N ai lr ecei ved the j ud gm ent i rr el evant . And i n any eve nt, o uro r derl i m i tingr ev i ew i n thi s ca se t o the o r derde ny i ngNai l ’ s se co nd po st j udg m en t m oti on would f or ecl ose thi s a rgum ent. The j ud gm ent o fthe dist ri ct c ourti s AFFI RM ED . N ail’s m ot ion to am en d h is appeal br i efi s D ENI ED .