United States v. Rolando Fernandez

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “an action cannot be brought through the catch-all provision of Rule 60(b)(6) if it could have been brought through one of the Rule’s first five subsections.”
• “an action cannot be brought through the catch-all provision of Rule 60(b)(6) if it could have been brought through one of the Rule’s first five subsections.”
• “‘[R]elief under subsection (6) is not available to a movant where . . . the relief sought would have been, if not for the Rule’s time limits, within the coverage of another of the subsections of the Rule.’”
• “‘[R]elief under subsection (6) is not available to a movant where . . . the relief sought would have been, if not for the Rule’s time limits, within the coverage of another of the subsections of the Rule.’”
• “‘[R]elief under subsection (6) is not available to a movant where . . . the relief sought would have been, if not for the Rule’s time limits, within the coverage of another of the subsections of the Rule.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).