Mata v. Stone

Filing 26

ORDER denying 25 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 3/13/2018. (pts)

Download PDF
FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT AUGUSTA niV. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA DUBLIN DIVISION 2018 HAR 13 PH CLERK MARCELINO SANCHEZ MATA, SO Petitioner, CV 317-042 V. STACEY N. STONE, Warden, Respondent. ORDER Presently Sanchez Order before Mata's of the motion for February Recommendation of 21, the Court is Petitioner reconsideration 2018, adopting of Marcelino this the Court's Report United States Magistrate Judge and and denying his petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241. A motion for reconsideration of a civil judgment may be filed within 28 days of entry of the judgment. P. 59(e). Fed. R. Civ. "The only grounds for granting a rule 59(e) motion are newly discovered evidence or manifest error of law or fact." Arthur v. King. 500 F.3d 1335, 1343 (ll"^^ Cir. 2007). A 59(e) Rule motion is not intended as a vehicle to re- litigate old matters, raise new arguments or present evidence that could have been raised prior to the entry of judgment. Michael Linet. Inc. v. Village of Wellington. Fla.. 408 F.3d 757, 763 (ll'^^ Cir. 2005). 13 In this case, Petitioner does not advance any new evidence or other ground to warrant reconsideration of this Court's prior Order. Rather, Petitioner simply rehashes the same arguments that were fully addressed in the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, Petitioner's motion for reconsideration (doc. no. 25) is DENIED. ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, this day of March, 2018. UNITED S DISTRICT JUDGE

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?