Embry v. Guirbino
Filing
44
ORDER DENYING 38 Motion for Reconsideration, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/17/2017. (Kusamura, W)
1
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
RAYVAUGHN ROYCE EMBREY,
6
7
8
CASE NO. 1:04-CV-6101 AWI JMD
Petitioner,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION
v.
G.J. GUIRBINO,
(Doc. No. 38)
9
Respondent.
10
11
12
On September 15, 2017, the Court denied Petitioner’s Rule 60(b)(6) motion. See Doc. No.
13
37. As part of that order, the Court stated that no motions for reconsideration would be
14
considered. See id.
15
On October 2, 2017, Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration. See Doc. No. 38.
16
The motion for reconsideration will be denied for two reasons. First, it is unauthorized and
17
violates the terms of the Court’s September 15, 2017 order. See Doc. No. 37. Second, Petitioner
18
has not shown that reconsideration is warranted. See Marlyn Nutraceuticals, Inc. v. Mucos
19
Pharma GmbH & Co., 571 F.3d 873, 880 (9th Cir. 2009). Rather, the motion expresses
20
disagreements with the Court’s conclusions. Clark v. County of Tulare, 755 F.Supp.2d 1075,
21
1099-1100 (E.D. Cal. 2010).
22
23
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration
(Doc. No. 38) is DENIED.
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 17, 2017
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?