David Librace appeals from the order of the District Court 1 affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits. The only orders properly before this Court on appeal are the orders granting the Commissioner’s motion for relief filed under Rule 60(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and denying Librace’s motion to alter or amend filed under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We conclude that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in making those rulings. See Keller v. City of Fremont, 719 F.3d 931, 946 (8th Cir. 2013) (reviewing the district court’s ruling on a Rule 60(a) motion for an abuse of discretion); Sipp v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 975, 981 (8th Cir. 2011) (reviewing the distinct court’s ruling on a Rule 59(e) motion for an abuse of discretion). We affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.