Mata v. Stone

Filing 26

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

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. § 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