JAMES HANCOCK, Senior District Judge
The court has before it the Motion to Reconsider, Vacate, or Set Aside (Doc. #38) filed by Plaintiff Sherry M. Hilyer, proceeding pro se, on March 1, 2011. The Motion (Doc. #38) does not set out any rule of civil procedure upon which Plaintiff is relying for reconsideration. ( See generally Doc. #38).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 allows for relief from a judgment or order for the following reasons: (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 not longer equitable; or (6) any other reason that justifies relief. FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b). However, a motion seeking relief under Rule 60(b) "must be made within a reasonable time" and "the party seeking relief bears the burden of establishing that changed circumstances warrant relief." FED. R. CIV. P. 60(c)(1); see also Horne v. Flores, 129 S. Ct. 2579, 2593 (2009).
The problem for Plaintiff is that there have been no changed circumstances warranting relief from the final judgment which was entered in this case on January 31, 2011 (Doc. #37). On review, the current motion to reconsider, vacate, or set aside (Doc. #38) merely rehashes arguments made with the briefing on the original motion for summary judgment and is nothing but an attempt to appeal the final judgment entered by this court on January 31, 2011.
The law is clear that "a party may not use Rule 60 as a substitute for a timely and proper appeal." National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Virginia Cavins Progressive Sys., Inc., 2007 WL 2692723, at *2 (M.D. Ala. 2007) (citing Parks v. U.S. Life Credit Corp., 677 F.2d 838, 840 (11th Cir. 1982)).
Moreover, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59 allows for a motion to alter or amend a judgment within twenty-eight (28) days after entry of the final judgment. Under that Rule and applying Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6, Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. #38) is untimely since it was filed on March 1, 2011, twenty-nine (29) days after the final judgment was entered on January 31, 2011.
For all of the foregoing reasons, the Motion to Reconsider, Vacate, or Set Aside (Doc. #38) is DENIED.