Case Name: Aaron Keven DANIELSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albertus Johannes HUMAN, Defendant-Appellant, and Jan Petrus Human; H-Power Americas, Inc.; H-Power Worldwide, LLC; H-Power Energy Storage Technologies, Inc.; John Does 1-100, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-02-10
Citations: 676 F. App'x 198
Docket Number: No. 16-2125
Parties: Aaron Keven DANIELSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albertus Johannes HUMAN, Defendant-Appellant, and Jan Petrus Human; H-Power Americas, Inc.; H-Power Worldwide, LLC; H-Power Energy Storage Technologies, Inc.; John Does 1-100, Defendants.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 676
Pages: 198–199

Head Matter:
Aaron Keven DANIELSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albertus Johannes HUMAN, Defendant-Appellant, and Jan Petrus Human; H-Power Americas, Inc.; H-Power Worldwide, LLC; H-Power Energy Storage Technologies, Inc.; John Does 1-100, Defendants.
No. 16-2125
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: January 31, 2017
Decided: February 10, 2017
John McKinley Kirby, II, Law Offices of John M. Kirby, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Aaron Keven Danielson, Ap-pellee Pro Se.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Albertos Johannes Human appeals the district court's order denying relief on his untimely Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of its entry of default judgment. We review the district court's finding that Human's Rule 60(b) motion was untimely for abuse of discretion. Moses v. Joyner, 815 F.3d 163, 166 (4th Cir. 2016), petition for cert. filed, — U.S.L.W. — (U.S. Aug. 5, 2016) (No. 16-5507).
A district court "may set aside a final default judgment under Rule 60(b)," Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c), and such a motion must be filed within "a reasonable time," Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1). A movant seeking relief from a judgment under Rule 60(b) must make a threshold showing of "timeliness, a meritorious defense, a lack of unfair prejudice to the opposing party, and exceptional circumstances." Dowell v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Auto. Ins. Co., 993 F.2d 46, 48 (4th Cir. 1993) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Park Corp. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 812 F.2d 894, 896 (4th Cir. 1987) (holding that a movant must show that his motion is timely, that he has a meritorious defense, and that there would be no unfair prejudice and that, "[i]f the moving party makes such a showing, he must then satisfy one or more of the six grounds for relief set forth in Rule 60(b)").
We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Human's Rule 60(b) motion, filed more than 2 years after entry of judgment and more than 10 months after an enforcement action was filed, was untimely. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED