Case Name: Silvano L. VALENZUELA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-11-13
Citations: 21 F. App'x 761
Docket Number: No. 00-15577; D.C. No. CV-98-00539-BZ
Parties: Silvano L. VALENZUELA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 21
Pages: 761–762

Head Matter:
Silvano L. VALENZUELA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 00-15577.
D.C. No. CV-98-00539-BZ.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 5, 2001.
Decided Nov. 13, 2001.
Before KLEINFELD, McKEOWN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Silvano L. Valenzuela appeals the district court's order denying his motion to set aside the order dismissing his civil rights complaint and denying his motion to set aside the order granting partial summary judgment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion the district court's denial of Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motions, Bateman v. United States Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1223 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.
The district court held an evidentiary hearing, considered the appropriate equitable factors, and did not abuse its discretion by determining that Valenzuela failed to establish excusable neglect warranting relief from judgment. See id. at 1223-24.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.