Filed: Aug. 31, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-2421 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. 2035, Inc., a corporation lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant Robert L. Lytle, an individual, doing business as 2035 PMA and QLasers PMA lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant _ No. 17-3813 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. 2035, Inc., a corporation lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant Robert Larry Lytle, an individual, doing b
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-2421 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. 2035, Inc., a corporation lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant Robert L. Lytle, an individual, doing business as 2035 PMA and QLasers PMA lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant _ No. 17-3813 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. 2035, Inc., a corporation lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant Robert Larry Lytle, an individual, doing bu..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-2421
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
2035, Inc., a corporation
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant
Robert L. Lytle, an individual, doing business as 2035 PMA and QLasers PMA
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
___________________________
No. 17-3813
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
2035, Inc., a corporation
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant
Robert Larry Lytle, an individual, doing business as 2035 PMA, doing business as
QLasers PMA
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeals from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Rapid City
____________
Submitted: August 28, 2018
Filed: August 31, 2018
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Robert Larry Lytle appeals the district court’s1 denial of his multiple
postjudgment motions. We conclude that the district court did not err in denying the
motions. See Miller v. Baker Implement Co.,
439 F.3d 407, 414 (8th Cir. 2006)
(appellate court reviews denial of Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), 60(b) motions for abuse of
discretion). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).
______________________________
1
The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District
of South Dakota.
-2-