Trinidad v. Pangelinan
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM**
John S. and Merced B. Pangelinan, husband and wife, appeal pro se the district court’s judgment denying their Fed. *471R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4) motion to void a judgment rendered against them. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Virtual Vision, Inc. v. Praegitzer Indus., Inc. (In re Virtual Vision Inc.), 124 F.3d 1140, 1143 (9th Cir. 1997), and we affirm.
Because the underlying judgment had previously been affirmed by this court, the district court properly concluded that the Pangelinans’ motion lacked merit. See United States v. Berke, 170 F.3d 882, 883 (9th…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Allan Marvin BERKE, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Virtual Vision, Inc. v. Praegitzer Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pangelinan Et Ux. v. TrinidadSupreme Court of the United States · 2003