Adams v. Subia et al

Filing 54

ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 11/2/10 ORDERING that plaintiff's 10/6/10 motion for reconsideration, is DENIED. (Becknal, R)

(PC)Adams v. Subia et al

Doc. 54

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. R. SUBIA, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On September 27, 2010, the court dismissed this action and judgment was duly entered. Dckt. Nos. 51, 52. On October 6, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dckt. No. 53. Absent "highly unusual" circumstances, reconsideration pursuant to Rule 59(e) is appropriate only where 1) the court is presented with newly discovered evidence; 2) the court committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust; or 3) there is an intervening change in controlling law. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty. v. ACands, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). ALVAN A. ADAMS, Plaintiff, ORDER No. 2:07-cv-01225-MCE-EFB P IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

In addition, a Rule 59(e) motion for reconsideration "may not be used to raise arguments or present evidence for the first time when they could reasonably have been raised earlier in the litigation." Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877, 890 (9th Cir. 2000). Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration fails to meet the standards for relief under Rule 59(e). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's October 6, 2010 motion for reconsideration, is DENIED. Dated: November 2, 2010 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2