Harvey v. AK CHIN Indian Community et al

Filing 25

ORDER: Plaintiff's Motion for Extension to File a Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 24 ) is denied. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 11/18/2022. (CLM)

1
2

KAB

WO

3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

TL Harvey,

10
11
12
13

No. CV 22-00295-PHX-JAT (JZB)
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

Ak Chin Indian Community, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

Plaintiff TL Harvey, brought this pro se action against Defendants Ak Chin Indian

16

Community, Ak Chin Tribal Gaming Agency, Caesars Entertainment Corporation, and

17

individual Defendant tribal police officers Sordia, Gonzalez, and Trevino. (Doc. 1.) In a

18

November 4, 2022 Order, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claims and directed the Clerk of

19

the Court to enter Judgment. (Doc. 22.) Judgment was entered that day. (Doc. 23.)

20

Plaintiff now seeks an extension of time to file a “Motion for Reconsideration” and

21

asserts that he has shown good cause pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

22

Procedure. (Doc. 24.)

23

Although Plaintiff does not specify the rule under which he intends to seek

24

reconsideration, because Judgment has entered in this action, it appears that Plaintiff

25

intends to seek relief pursuant to either Rules 59(e) or 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

26

Procedure. The Court lacks authority to grant Plaintiff an extension of time to file a motion

27

pursuant to Rules 59(e) or 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ.

28

P. 6(b)(2) (“A court must not extend the time to act under Rules 50(b) and (d), 52(b), 59(b),

1

(d), and (e), and 60(b).” ). Accordingly, Plaintiff’ s request for an extension of time to file

2

a motion for reconsideration is denied.

3
4
5

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension to File a Motion for
Reconsideration (Doc. 24) is denied.
Dated this 18th day of November, 2022.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-