Quadri v. The United States

Filing 22

ORDER denying 20 Motion for Reconsideration filed by Taofeek A. Quadri. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on May 25, 2017. (mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
TAOFEEK A. QUADRI
V.

PLAINTIFF
CASE NO. 4:16-CV-04003

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;
and ERIC K. FANNING,
SECRETARY OF THE ARMY

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider Dismissal. ECF No. 20. Pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), Plaintiff moves the Court to reconsider the Order
dismissing his case. Defendants have responded to the motion. ECF No. 21. The Court finds
the matter ripe for consideration.
“Rule 59(e) motions serve the limited function of correcting ‘manifest errors of law or
fact or to present newly discovered evidence.’” Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist. v. Mallinckrodt,
Inc., 440 F.3d 930, 933 (8th Cir. 2006) (quoting Innovative Home Health Care v. P.T.-O.T.
Assoc. of the Black Hills, 141 F.3d 1284, 1286 (8th Cir. 1998)). “Such motions cannot be used
to introduce new evidence, tender new legal theories, or raise arguments which could have been
offered or raised prior to entry of judgment.” Id. After reviewing Plaintiff’s motion, the Court is
not convinced that Plaintiff points to a manifest error of law or fact that would justify amending
or altering its prior ruling. Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Motion to Reconsider
Dismissal (ECF No. 20) should be and hereby is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 25th day of May, 2017.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District Judge