Christopher Harris appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(3), to reopen a case in the district court due to fraud. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Sturm v. Harris, No. CA-00-353-1 (M.D.N-C. Dec. 21, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be *642 fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.