(2) declining to continue the trial; (3) holding Flores Our review of t he record reflects no abuse of discretion in the courtÂ’s proceeding to consider a nd grant RobinsonÂ’s summary judgment motion. The affidavit Flores proposed to submit in opposition thereto would not have added relevant evidence. 3 Flores adva nces no legitimate reason why the trial should have been continued and the courtÂ’s declining to do so was not an abuse of discretion. 4 Nor does Flores cite to any instance at trial when he was held to the standard of an attorn ey. The court neither prevented a question nor declined to consider any argument because of its phrasing.

As to the challenge to the courtÂ’s ruling on several proposed witnesses, we likewise find no abuse of discretion. The testimony Flores wished to elicit would have been repetitious and cumulative given the facts to which the parties stipulated at the beginning of the trial. 5 The contention that the court failed to address the claims that Lowe confiscated his state petitio n does not pass muster. The court found that LoweÂ’s actions as clerk complied with Texas law in all respects. Necessarily included in this ruling was a rejection of the alleged confiscation claim.

Flores has not shown any prejudice as a c onsequence of his action being placed on Track 2 of the Eastern DistrictÂ’s litigation management plan. The suggestion that his equal protection rights were impaired is totally without merit.

Finally, Flores§ 1983 claims. This court therefore lacks jurisdiction to review the ruling on the Rule 60(b) motion. An appeal on the merits does not include an appeal of any subsequent Rule 60(b) ruling. A separate notice of appeal is required. 6 AFFIRMED.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Cour t has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limit ed circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. 1 Prior to trial on the claims against Lowe, the trial court dismis sed t he claims against Robinson, a Texas Department of Criminal Justice nurse. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-40415 Summary Calendar ERBEY FLORES, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus NELL LOWE, District Clerk, Polk County, Texas, Et Al., Defendants, NELL LOWE, District Clerk, Polk County, Texas, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (9:96-CV-215) January 14, 2000 Before POLITZ, WIENER and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Erbey Flores, a Te xas prisoner, appeals the bench trial dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Nell Lowe, clerk of the s tate court in Polk County, Texas, and others. Flores contends that the district court erred by abusing its discretion in: (1) declining to defe r its ruling on defendant Wilma RobinsonÂ’s summary judgment motion;

2 Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). 3 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f); Krim v. BancTexas Group, Inc. , 989 F.2d 1435 (5th Cir. 1993). 4 Dorsey v. Scott Wetzel Services, Inc. , 84 F.3d 170 (5th Cir. 1996). 5 Harvey v. Andrist , 754 F.2d 569 (5th Cir. 1985)

6 Williams v. Chater , 87 F.3d 702 (5th Cir. 1996)