Valencia v. Barns

Filing 18

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 12/18/2014 DENYING plaintiff's 11 motion for reconsideration. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

EDWIN VALENCIA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:13-cv-2068-CMK-P

vs.

ORDER

RON BARNS,

15

Defendant.

16

/

17

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

19

636(c) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action. Pending before the court is

20

plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 11) of the court’s denial of a temporary restraining

21

order.

22

Under Rule 60(b), the court may grant reconsideration of a final judgment and any

23

order based on, among other things: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2)

24

newly discovered evidence which, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered

25

within ten days of entry of judgment; and (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct of an

26

opposing party. A motion for reconsideration on any of these grounds must be brought within a
1

1

reasonable time and no later than one year of entry of judgment or the order being challenged.

2

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1).

3

Here, plaintiff disagrees with the court’s decision to deny his motion for a

4

temporary restraining order without prejudice. He does not claim there is any new evidence or

5

any misconduct. Plaintiff sets forth additional detail as to the factors supporting a temporary

6

restraining order. However, none of the additional information plaintiff provides the court shows

7

the court made a mistake in denying his premature motion, only that plaintiff disagrees with that

8

decision. A disagreement with the court’s decision is not a sufficient basis for the court to grant

9

a motion for reconsideration under Rule 60. Plaintiff has filed a renewed motion, which the

10
11
12

court will address separately.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for
reconsideration (Doc. 11) is denied.

13
14
15
16

DATED: December 18, 2014
______________________________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2