Heller v. Cepia L.L.C. et.al.

Filing 86

ORDER Continuing Deadline to Pay Sanctions. Signed by Judge James Ware for Judge Jeffrey S. White on January 6, 2012. (jswlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

JASON G. HELLER,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

Plaintiff,

No. C 11-01146 JSW

v.
CEPIA, L.L.C., et al.,

13

ORDER CONTINUING
DEADLINE TO PAY SANCTIONS
FOR RECONSIDERATION

Defendants.
/

14
15

The Court has received the administrative motion from Plaintiff’s counsel Robert C.

16

Matz seeking to extend the deadline for payment of sanctions. The Court HEREBY GRANTS

17

Matz’ administrative motion and continues the deadline for payment of sanctions until February

18

3, 2012. Mr. Matz shall file his administrative motion for relief from payment of sanctions

19

based on financial hardship by no later than January 13, 2012. In this motion, Mr. Matz shall

20

address what amount he could afford to pay and propose a payment plan.

21

The Court notes Mr. Matz also intends to file a motion for leave to file a motion for

22

reconsideration. Under local rule 7-9, a party may seek leave to file a motion for

23

reconsideration any time before judgment. N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-9(a). A motion for reconsideration

24

may be made on one of three grounds: (1) a material difference in fact or law exists from that

25

which was presented to the Court, which, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, the party

26

applying for reconsideration did not know at the time of the order; (2) the emergence of new

27

material facts or a change of law; or (3) a manifest failure by the Court to consider material

28

facts or dispositive legal arguments presented before entry of judgment. N.D. Civ. L.R. 79(b)(1)-(3).

1

The moving party may not reargue any written or oral argument previously asserted to the

2

Court. Id., 7-9(c). Upon review of the arguments Mr. Matz has presented in his administrative

3

motion, the Court finds that he has not provided sufficient grounds to warrant leave to file a

4

motion for reconsideration. He argues that the Court failed to consider evidence and arguments

5

he presented to the Court. However, the Court reviewed and considered all of his evidence and

6

arguments in addressing the motion for sanctions and found them insufficient. If there was an

7

additional argument or new evidence Mr. Matz wanted the Court to consider, he could have and

8

should have moved for leave to submit supplementary materials. Should Mr. Matz file a motion

9

for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, he must satisfy the requirements of Northern

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

District Local Civil Rule 7-9(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

Dated: January 6, 2012
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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