Blumenthal-Guigui v. Gidney

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Rule 60(b)(3)’s one-year time limit is a mandatory claim-processing rule that cannot be tolled
• concluding that “Rule 60(b)’s one-year time limit is mandatory” and that courts are “without discretion to extend [the] one-year time limit for equitable reasons, whatever their metit”’
• holding that equitable tolling does not apply to Rule 60(b)(3) motions
• explaining that “the grounds for Rule 60(b)(6) are ‘mutually exclusive’ from the grounds of other Rule 60(b
• “[T]he one-year limit is an outer limit of what may be timely.” (emphasis in original)
• “the grounds for Rule 60(b) (6) are mutually exclusive from the grounds of other Rule 60(b) motions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).