Whether Petitioner Daniel Coleman Rule 60 is timely under Federal rules of Procedure Rule 60?

QUESTION PRESENTED Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) authorizes relief from final judgment based on “mistake,” as well as “inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” 1. The question presented is: Whether Petitioner Daniel Coleman Rule 60 is timely under Federal rules of Procedure Rule 60? : 2. The question presented is: Whether Rule 60 authorizes relief based on a and/or fraud upon the court committed by opposing counsel? | CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED 28 U.S.C.8§ 1254;'1257; and 2101(c). MN Statutes ( Minn. Stat. § 518.58 (2012) 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(25) ‘ (Minnesota Statutes, section 1214.05) (MN Stat 1794.06) Individual with Disabilities Education Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Family Educational and Privacy Rights Act). (Minn. Stat. 1214.05 &121A.06:Reports of Dangerous Weapons incidents in Schools) 1. Defendant Filed motion for summary judgment with a hearing scheduled for December, 2021. | 2. Petitioner Daniel Colemans case was dismissed for summary Judgment on April 22, 2021 . 3 Mr Coleman submitted a rule 59 and sought rehearing and certiorari for his rule 59. | ; ‘ ’ JURISDICTION | [ ] For cases from federal courts: The date on, which the United States Court of Appeals decided my case ~ was sate 29 Tues fig Saute § TOLLE [ ] No petition for rehearing was timely filed in my case. ~[>¢ A timely petition for rehearing was denied by the United States Court of Appeals on the following date: bd . ,andacopy ofthe | order denying rehearing appears at