Brumbaugh v. Roberts

Filing 10

ORDER DENYING Motion 9 , signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/9/13. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JERRY DWAYNE BRUMBAUGH,
Plaintiff,

12

ORDER DENYING MOTION

v.

13
14

Case No. 1:13-cv-01598-LJO-SAB

ECF NO. 9

JOHN ROBERTS,

15

Defendant.

16
17

On December 4, 2013, Plaintiff Jerry Dwayne Brumbaugh (“Plaintiff”) filed a document

18 entitled “1. Reply to letter of return of case filed; 2. Motion for a Default judgment; 3 Or, motion
19 for specifics from defendant.” (ECF No. 9.) The Court will construe Plaintiff’s filing as a
20 motion for reconsideration of the Court’s entry of judgment against Plaintiff.
21

A motion for reconsideration should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances,

22 unless the Court is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or there is
23 an intervening change in controlling law. Carroll v. Nakatani, 342 F.3d 934, 945 (9th Cir. 2003).
24 Plaintiff’s motion does not demonstrate any valid grounds for reconsideration. The arguments in
25 Plaintiff’s motion are frivolous and nonsensical.
26 / / /
27 / / /
28 / / /

1

1

Based upon the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED.

2
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

December 9, 2013
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

2