meaning a movant cannot offer reasons for relief under the Rule 60(b)(6) motion that could otherwise be considered under one of the more specific provisions of Rule 60(b)(l)-(5). Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership, 507 U.S. 380, 393, 113 S.Ct. 1489, 123 L.Ed.2d 74 (1991) (citation omitted); United States v. Box 111, Firetower Rd., 920 F.2d 788, 791 (11th Cir.1991) (citation omitted); Solaroll Shade and Shutter Corp., Inc. v. Bio-Energy Systems, Inc., 803 F.2d 1130, 1133 (11th Cir.1986) (citations omitted). Due to this mutual exclusivity and following the referral Order, the Magistrate Judge completed an analysis under both Rule 60(b)(1) and Rule 60(b)(6). i. Rule 60(b)(1) Analysis Timeliness is the threshold , 174 F.R.D. 110, 112 (M.D.Fla.1997) (<HOLDING>) (citations omitted); Abbey v. Mercedes-Benz of
holding that negligence on the part of a legal secretary is imputed to the supervising attorney and the statute of limitations for professional services applies to both holding negligence on the part of the attorney does not qualify for such relief holding that an attorneys negligence alone does not qualify for such relief holding violation of the rules of professional conduct does not create a legal duty on the part of the lawyer nor constitute negligence per se although it may be used as some evidence of negligence holding that negligence does not violate the due process clause but reserving the question whether gross negligence does