Steward v. Igbinosa et al

Filing 19

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/15/17 denying 18 Motion for Reconsideration. The order filed 1/20/17 is affirmed. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

DONNY STEWARD,

11

No. 2:16-cv-2289 CKD P

Plaintiff,

12

v.

ORDER

13

NGOZI O. IGBINOSA, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15
On February 6, 2017, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the order filed January

16
17

20, 2017, denying plaintiff’s motion to log exhibits. (ECF No. 18.)

18

A district court1 may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

19

59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255,

20

1262 (9th Cir. 1993). “Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with

21

newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly

22

unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Id. at 1263. Here, the court’s

23

decision was not clearly erroneous nor manifestly unjust, and none of the other factors apply.
In its January 20, 2017 order, the court instructed plaintiff to limit his amended complaint

24
25

to “25 pages of pleading, plus any relevant exhibits.” Thus plaintiff is not barred from

26

resubmitting any exhibits relevant to his claims.

27
28

1

Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge to conduct all proceedings in this
action. (ECF No. 6.)
1

1

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 18) is denied; and

3

2. The order filed January 20, 2017 is affirmed.

4

Dated: February 15, 2017

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

5
6
7
8
9

2/stew2289.R60

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2