Court Opinion

ID: 1031744
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-05 08:36:32.657681+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:44:15.150818
License: Public Domain

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
 

  Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
 

  PER CURIAM:
 

  Henry Pierce appeals the district court’s order denying as untimely his motion filed
   
   *361
   
  pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6), in which he sought a new trial on his excessive force claims. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
  
   Pierce v. City of Mullins Police Dep’t,
  
  No. 4:00-cv-04004-TLW (D.S.C. Oct. 7, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
 

   AFFIRMED.