Harper v. Federal Prison Industries, Inc. et al

Filing 207

ORDER denying 206 Motion to Reopen. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 2/12/2014.(klyon, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Case No. 07-cv-00750-REB-KMT
DONALD ALTON HARPER,
Plaintiff,
v.
P. URBANO, P.A., and
NORMAN S. ROSENTHAL, M.D.,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REOPEN
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on the filing captioned On Motion Requesting To
Reopen Pursuant To Federal Rule Civil Procedure Clear Error [#206]1 filed August
5, 2013. I deny the motion.
The plaintiff, Don Harper, is acting pro se. Therefore, I construe his filings
generously and with the leniency due pro se litigants. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551
U.S. 89, ___, 127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076
(10th Cir. 2007); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). Reading the
motion of Mr. Harper generously, I construe it as a motion for post-judgment relief under
FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e) or 60(b).

1

“[#206]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

In his motion, Mr. Harper appears to contend that payments for filing fees in
another case or cases and, possibly, in this case continue to be deducted from his
prison account. He contends that an order dated May 20, 2007, which requires him to
make monthly payments of twenty percent (20%) is in error. He mentions also Civil
Action No. 05-cv-00610-ZLW, but that case did not involve Mr. Harper. Mr. Harper cites
no specific facts that implicate any error in the execution of the orders entered in this
case and no specific facts or arguments that indicate that any of the orders entered in
this case are in error.
“(A) Rule 59(e) motion is normally granted only to correct manifest errors of law
or to present newly discovered evidence.” Jennings v. Rivers, 394 F.3d 850, 854
(10th Cir.2005) (internal quotation omitted). In his motion, Mr. Harper has demonstrated
neither a manifest error of law nor the need to present newly discovered evidence. Rule
60(b) lists six bases on which a party may seek relief from a final judgment. Having
considered the motion of Mr. Harper, I find that he has not cited or circumstantiated any
valid grounds for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b).
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion stated in the filing captioned On
Motion Requesting To Reopen Pursuant To Federal Rule Civil Procedure Clear
Error [#206] filed August 5, 2013, is DENIED.
Dated February 12, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2