
    Rose APUZZI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Rose Apuzzi, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. American Medical Systems, Inc., Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 17-1450, No. 17-1699
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: October 17, 2017
    Decided: November 1, 2017
    Joseph L. Messa, Jr., MESSA & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appellant. Barbara R. Binis, Rachel B. Weil, REED SMITH LLP, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Kim M. Watterson, REED SMITH LLP, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; M. Patrick Yingling, REED SMITH LLP, Chicago, Illinois; Michael J. Farrell, Erik W. Legg, FARRELL, WHITE & LEGG PLLC, Huntington, West Virginia; for Ap-pellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Rose Apuzzi challenges the district court’s order denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider the dismissal of her complaint for failure to comply with a discovery order and the court’s order denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion seeking to alter or amend the order denying her Rule 60(b) motion. After reviewing the record and the parties’ arguments, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Apuzzi’s motions. See Mayfield v. Nat’l Ass’n for Stock Car Auto Racing, Inc., 674 F.3d 369, 378 (4th Cir. 2012); Aikens v. Ingram, 652 F.3d 496, 501 (4th Cir. 2011) (en banc). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgments. Apuzzi v. Am. Med. Sys., Inc., No. 2:14-cv-28603, 2017 WL 927612 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 8, 2017 & May 30, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED  