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