Montalvo v. Malfi

Filing 82

ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 03/07/11 DENYING 80 Motion for Reconsideration. (Williams, D)

-DAD (TEMP)(HC) Montalvo v. Malfi

Doc. 82

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. MALFI, Respondent. / On February 24, 2011, petitioner filed a motion asking that this court reconsider its February 2, 2011 order adopting the magistrate judge's November 23, 2010 findings and recommendations thereby dismissing this action. A district court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law." Id. at 1263. ///// ///// ///// ORDER JOHN MONTALVO, Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-1224 LKK DAD (TEMP) 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

Petitioner does not present newly discovered evidence suggesting this matter should not be dismissed. Furthermore, the court finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the February 2, 2011 order adopting the November 23, 2010 findings and recommendations is neither manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's February 24, 2011 motion for reconsideration is denied. DATED: March 7, 2011.