Opinion ID: 573636
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Pachulski's Motion To Vacate Judgment

Text: 9 Pachulski also contends that the district court erred in not granting his motion to vacate the order granting summary judgment on the grounds of excusable neglect under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1). The district court, however, found that appellant's attorney's delay in filing the opposition was not excusable. That finding is amply supported by the record, and is not clearly erroneous. Furthermore, even if excusable neglect were found, the district court has discretion whether or not to relieve a party from an order. See Smith v. Stone, 308 F.2d 15, 18 (9th Cir.1962) (finding no abuse of discretion on facts similar to those in this case).