STORMAN v. OFFICE OF SECRETARY UNITED STATES DHHS (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Michael D. Storman appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Storman's motion for relief from judgment because Storman failed to demonstrate any basis for such relief. See id. at 1263 (setting forth grounds for relief under Rule 60).

We lack jurisdiction to review the dismissal because the record reflects that Storman's action was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. See Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1507 (9th Cir. 1995) (“A voluntary dismissal without prejudice is ordinarily not a final judgment from which the plaintiff may appeal.”); WMX Techs., Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1135 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc) (issue of jurisdiction must be raised sua sponte).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, see Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009), or documents not filed with the district court, see United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990).

Storman's motion to expedite the case (Docket Entry No. 4) is denied.

AFFIRMED.