Hillmar-Ivan Bittner appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his motion to reconsider the dismissal of his complaint challenging the constitutionality of a Minnesota child-custody decree. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion as Bittner’s motion did not allege any cognizable grounds for postjudgment relief or otherwise show exceptional circumstances warranting relief. See Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 862 F.2d 161, 169 (8th Cir. 1988). Accordingly, we affirm.