Denial of Rule 60(b) Motion Affirmed
In In re: Sealed Case (Bowles), No. 07-5411, a motion to vacate an arbitration award, the court affirmed the denial of appellant's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, holding that Rule 60(b) was unavailable to allow appellant to file a timely appeal -- a holding that was in accord with the majority of circuits holding that with the 1991 amendment adding subsection (6), Appellate 4(a)(6) became the exclusive means of reopening the time to appeal.
As the court wrote: "In Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007), the Supreme Court held that 28 U.S.C. § 2107, as carried into practice by Appellate Rule 4(a)(6), is jurisdictional and that courts lack power to create equitable exceptions. The question presented in this appeal is whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) remains available to circumvent the 180-day deadline in the appellate rule for reopening the time to file an appeal."
- Read the DC Circuit's Decision in In re: Sealed Case (Bowles), No. 07-5411