Snider v. Superintendent

Filing 32

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 31 Motion to Alter or Amend Order Denying T.R. 60 Motion. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 10/13/2023. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (jdb)

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00149-TLS document 32 filed 10/13/23 page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
BILL SNIDER,
Petitioner,
v.

CAUSE NO.: 3:16-CV-149-TLS

SUPERINTENDENT,
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Motion to Alter or Amend Order Denying T.R. 60
Motion [ECF No. 31], filed on October 12, 2023. Bill Snider, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed
this motion asking the Court to reconsider the order denying his Rule 60 motion [ECF No. 30].
Snider requests relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), but that rule only applies to
altering or amending a judgment. Because Snider is proceeding without a lawyer, the Court will
construe his motion as being made pursuant to Rule 60(b). An order granting relief under Rule
60(b) is an “extraordinary” remedy reserved for “exceptional circumstances.” O’Brien v. Vill. of
Lincolnshire, 955 F.3d 616, 629 (7th Cir. 2020). “Reconsideration is not an appropriate forum
for rehashing previously rejected arguments.” Ahmed v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 247, 249 (7th Cir.
2004) (cleaned up). Here, Snider raises nothing new and provides no basis for finding that the
Court erred when it denied his Rule 60 motion.
For these reasons, the Court hereby DENIES the Motion to Alter or Amend Order
Denying T.R. 60 Motion [ECF No. 31].
SO ORDERED on October 13, 2023.
s/ Theresa L. Springmann
JUDGE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT