Donald Robin Barren v. DWIGHT NEVEN, Warden;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DONALD ROBIN BARREN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
DWIGHT NEVEN, Warden; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
PHILIP J. KOHN; et al.,
Defendants.
No. 19-16852
D.C. No. 2:13-cv-01492-RCJ-GWF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 19, 2021**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Donald Robin Barren appeals pro se from the district
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JUL 29 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 19-16852
court’s order denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion for relief
from the court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various
claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of
discretion. Washington v. Ryan, 833 F.3d 1087, 1091 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc).
We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Barren’s motion for
relief under Rule 60(b) because the motion was filed more than two years after the
entry of judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1) (requiring a motion under Rule
60(b) to be made within a reasonable time—and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no
more than a year after the entry of the judgment).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Barren’s motion for miscellaneous relief (Docket Entry No. 22) is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --