until September 11,1996, well outside the allowable period. This Court, therefore, has no jurisdiction to review the June 12th dismissal order. C. Timely Notice of Appeal on Territorial Court's Denial of Rule 60(b) Motion This Court, on the other hand, does have jurisdiction to review the denial of appellant's Rule 60(b) motion. Since a motion under Rule 60(b) is not a substitute for an appeal of the underlying order being reconsidered, the appeal of a denial of a Rule 60(b) motion brings up for review only whether the trial court abused its discretion in so denying the motion itself; it does not bring up for review the merits of the underlying order or judgment. See, e.g., Browder v. Director, Dept. Of Corrections of Ill., 434 U.S. 257, 263 n.7, 54 L. Ed. 2d 521, 98 S. Ct. 556 (1978) (<HOLDING>). An abuse of discretion occurs where there is
holding that the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion holding that appeal from denial of rule 60b motion raised for review only the district courts order of denial and not the underlying judgment itself holding that the standard of review under rule 60 is abuse of discretion holding that an appeal from a denial of a rule 59e motion should have been construed as seeking review of the underlying judgment holding that the standard of review is abuse of discretion and an appeal from denial of rule 60b relief does not bring up the underlying judgment for review