Mohamed v. Sessions et al

Filing 22

ORDER re 20 Letter to Request Permission to File Motion to Reconsider filed by Abdihakim Mohamed (Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 12/12/2017. (DLO)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil No. 17-5331(DSD/BRT) Abdihakim Mohamed Petitioner, v. ORDER Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, Attorney General; et al. Respondents. Kimberly K. Hunter, Esq., John R. Bruning, Esq. and Kim Hunter Law, PLLC, 656 Selby Avenue, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55104, counsel for petitioner. Ann M. Bildtsen, United States Attorney’s Office, 300 South 4th Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55415, counsel for respondents. This matter is before the court upon the request by petitioner for permission to file a motion to reconsider the court’s December 5, 2017, order denying restraining order. petitioner’s motion for a temporary See ECF No. 19. Motions to reconsider require the express permission of the court and will be granted only upon a showing of “compelling circumstances.” D. Minn. LR 7.1(j). A motion to reconsider should not be employed to relitigate old issues but rather to “afford an opportunity for relief in extraordinary circumstances.” Dale & Selby Superette & Deli v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 838 F. Supp. 1346, 1348 (D. Minn. 1993). correctly concluded The court is fully satisfied that it that it did not have jurisdiction over petitioner’s claim, and finds that compelling circumstances do not exist to grant the request. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the request for permission to file a motion to reconsider [ECF No. 20] is denied. Dated: December 12, 2017 s/David S. Doty David S. Doty, Judge United States District Court

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?