Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Rogers v. KBR Tech Svc Inc, 08-20378 (2009)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 08-20378 Visitors: 29
Filed: Jul. 09, 2009
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 9, 2009 No. 08-20378 Charles R. Fulbruge III Summary Calendar Clerk NORIS G. ROGERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KBR TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas 4:06-CV-1389 Before DAVIS, GARZA and PRADO, Circuit Judges.. PER CURIAM:* This is an appeal from the district court’s order denying
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 9, 2009 No. 08-20378 Charles R. Fulbruge III Summary Calendar Clerk NORIS G. ROGERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KBR TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas 4:06-CV-1389 Before DAVIS, GARZA and PRADO, Circuit Judges.. PER CURIAM:* This is an appeal from the district court’s order denying appellant’s Rule 60(b)(6) motion. On June 9, 2008, we affirmed the district court’s order confirming the arbitration award entered in this case. See Noris G. Rogers v. KBR Technical Services Inc., No. 08-20036 (5th Cir. June 9, 2008), for a discussion of the issues presented. While that case was on appeal, appellant filed a Rule 60(b) motion * Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . R. 47.5.4. No. 08-20378 seeking relief on grounds of newly submitted evidence. The district court denied the motion because that evidence was available to appellant before the district court rendered its original judgment. Appellant, in his Rule 60(b) motion simply repeated arguments he had already made to the district court Our review of the record and briefs persuades us that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Rule 60(b) motion. AFFIRMED. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer