NOT FOR PU.BLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI‘[ REP()RTS ANI) PAC`IFIC REPORTEFI{ NO. 296 L)W 3 IN THE lNTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS ©F THE STATE OF HAWAlT }* ASHLEN AQUILA and lVY AQUlLA, and on behalf of KYLlE B@WlLDEW GRACIE DEWILDE and LILY DEWlLDE, Petitioners~Appellees, v. ERlC L. DAVlES and MIRELLA M. DAVlES, Respondents~Appellants APPEAL FROM THE DlSTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT WAIALUA DlVISION (Civ. No. lSSO7+l~755) SUMMARY DISPOSITlON ORDER (By: Nakamura, Presiding Judge, Fujise and Leonard, JJ.) Respondents~Appellants Eric L. Davies and Mirella M. Davies (collectively the "Davies") appeal, pro se, from the summary denial of their "Motion for Relief from Order for lnjunction and Relief from Order Granting Attorneys Fees" (Motion for Relief) entered on January 22, 2009 by the District Court of the First Circuit, Waialua Division (district court).1 On appeal, the Davies assert that the district court abused its discretion when it denied the Motion for Relief without a hearing. The Davies argue that they were entitled to relief under HawaiYi District Court Rules of Civil Procedure (DCRCP) Rule 60(b)(6). We disagree. This appeal arises out of a "Petition for EX Parte Temporary Restraining Order and for Injunction Against Harassment" pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 604-l0.5 filed by Petitioners-Appellees Ashlen Aguila and lvy Aquila (Aquilas) on June l3, 2007 seeking an order enjoining the Davies from certain acts towards the Aquilas. An "Order Granting 1 The Honorable Hilary Benson Gangnes presided. N()T FOR PUBLIC,A'I."ION IN WES'I."S HA\NAI"I. REP()R']`S AN'D PAC`I`FI_C REPORTER attorneys' fees and co The district court entered an award for fees and costs on November 20, 2007. The Davies filed a notice of appeal from the award of attorneys’ fees and costs on Decemher lB, 2007. ln a summary disposition order filed on January 20, 2009, this court affirmed the order of the district court. Acduila v. Davies, No. 289l4, 2009 WL l32045 at *2 (App. January 20, 2009). On January 20, 2009, the Davies submitted the Motion for Relief. The Motion for Relief was "hrought pursuant to Rules 7 and 60(b) of the District Court Rules of Civil Procedure ." In denying the Motion for Relief, the district court wrote: "DCRCP does not apply to HRS § 604-l0.5. See DCRCP Rule 8l(a)(4)." The denied Motion for Relief was filed on January 22, 2009. On January 30, 2009, the Davies submitted a "Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Motion for Relief from Order for Injunction and Relief from Order Granting Attorneys Fees" (Motion to Reconsider). The Motion to Reconsider was made pursuant to DCRCP Rules 7 and 59. ln the Motion to Reconsider, the Davies argued that they were entitled to relief under DCRCP Rule 60(b>(6). The Motion to Reconsider was denied and filed on February l0, 2009. Based on a review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying the Davies's Motion for Relief. Therefore, lT lS HEREBY ORDERED that the district court's denial of the "Motion for Relief from Order for lnjunction and Relief NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN W§EST'S HAWA!‘I REPOR'I`S A_Nl) PACIFIC REPORT`ER from ©rder Granting attorneys Fees" entered on January 2Z, 2009 in the District Court of the First Circuit, Waialua Division is affirmed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai“i, January 25, 20l0. ©n the briefs: Erio L. Davies CjZ;@7 ;H< jZi;“é;W¢¢¢G~\- Mirella M. Davies, Chief Judge Respondents~Appellants pro se. R. Laree McGuire " (Porter Tom Quitiguit Chee & Watts), for Petitioners~Appellees. _~/ § *ssociate uudge