Tony Hines v. Dwight W. Neven;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TONY HINES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DWIGHT W. NEVEN; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 12-17841
D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01481-PMP-
GWF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Philip M. Pro, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 17, 2013**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Tony Hines appeals pro se from the district court’s
order denying his motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 60(b) following the dismissal of Hines’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as
barred by the statute of limitations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
FILED
JAN 02 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

We review for an abuse of discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or. v.
ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hines’s motion for
relief from judgment because Hines failed to establish grounds for relief under
Rule 60(b). See id. at 1263 (grounds for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b));
see also Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.250 (grounds for equitable tolling under Nevada law);
Perez v. Seevers, 869 F.2d 425, 426 (9th Cir. 1989) (per curiam) (§ 1983 actions
are governed by the forum state’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims;
two-year statute of limitations under Nevada law).
Because the scope of this appeal is limited to review of the November 26,
2012, order denying Hines’s motion for reconsideration, we do not address the
other issues that Hines raises.
AFFIRMED.
12-17841 2

-- 2 of 2 --