Demos v. United States of America, et al

Filing 8

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/15/2010 DENYING pltf's 7 motion for reconsideration. (Yin, K)

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. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants. / On June 7, 2010, plaintiff filed a document the court construes as a motion for reconsideration of the denial of plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis. A ruling in the district court may reconsidered 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. Plaintiff fails to point to anything suggesting reconsideration is warranted. ///// ///// ///// ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-10-1003 KJM P

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
1 demo1003.mfr

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's June 7, 2010 motion for reconsideration (docket no. 7) is denied. DATED: June 15, 2010.