Christine Gillespie v. Clifford Janey

OPINION

Pro se appellant Christine Gillespie appeals the District Court’s denial of her motion to vacate the judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4) & (d). 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our review is plenary. See Budget Blinds, Inc. v. White, 536 F.3d 244, 251 & n. 5 (3d Cir.2008); see also Herring v. United States, 424 F.3d 384, 389 (3d Cir.2005) (noting that a motion under the “savings clause” is an independent action subject to de novo review). For the reasons that follow, we will summarily affirm the judgment of the District Court.

In 2009, Gillespie filed a…