Payne v. Martin et al
Filing
46
ORDER denying 44 Motion for Reconsideration signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/23/13. (Kaminski, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
LEE THIEL PAYNE,
11
Plaintiff,
12
vs.
13
No. 2:11-cv-1970 LKK EFB P
J. MARTIN, et al.,
14
Defendants.
15
ORDER
/
16
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action
17
seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 5, 2013, the undersigned dismissed
18
defendant Martin from this action without prejudice. Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of that
19
order.
20
Local Rule 230(j) requires that a motion for reconsideration state “what new or
21
different facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon
22
such prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion,” and “why the facts or
23
circumstances were not shown at the time of the prior motion.” E.D. Cal., Local Rule 230(j)(3)-
24
(4).
25
26
On October 17, 2012 the assigned magistrate judge provided plaintiff with
instructions for effecting service of process on defendant Martin and warned plaintiff that failure
1
to comply with the order or to show good cause for such failure would result in a
2
recommendation that defendant Martin be dismissed, citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). After plaintiff
3
failed to comply with that order, the magistrate judge recommended that defendant Martin be
4
dismissed. Plaintiff failed to file timely objections. Thereafter, the undersigned adopted the
5
magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissed defendant Martin .
6
7
Through his request for reconsideration, plaintiff fails to demonstrate any new or
different facts or circumstances that entitle him to reconsideration of the order of dismissal.
8
9
10
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration
is DENIED.
DATED: April 23, 2013
11
12
13
14
15
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?