IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:24-CV-00127-KDB-DCK

ANWAR A. AALAAM,

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

MOVEMENT MORTGAGE, LLC,

Defendant.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No. 17). Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the Court's final dismissal of this action under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59(e) and 60(b). Those rules permits a court to “alter or amend” or correct orders and provide relief from judgment under the following circumstances: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or (6) any other reason that justifies relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Rule 60(b) is an “extraordinary remedy” which sets aside “the sanctity of [a] final judgment.” Compton y. Alton Steamship Co., Inc.,

(4th Cir. 1979) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). The Court finds that none of the circumstances reflected in Rule 60(b)(1)-(5) apply here. Further, relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6) should be granted only upon a showing that relief is “appropriate to accomplish justice” in “situations involving extraordinary circumstances.” Dowell v. State Farm Fire Cas. Auto. Ins. Co.,

(4th Cir. 1993) Gnternal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Court concludes that reversal of the Court's dismissal order is neither necessary to “accomplish justice” nor does this case involve “extraordinary circumstances” (beyond the frivolous nature of Plaintiff’s claims as described in the Court’s earlier order). Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion will be denied. ORDER NOW THEREFORE IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No. 17) is DENIED; and 2. The Clerk is directed to maintain this matter as closed in accordance with this Order.

SO ORDERED ADJUDGED AND DECREED. Signed: August 29, 2024

Kenneth D. Bell United States District Judge woe