Ighalo v. Astrue

Filing 34

ORDER denying 32 motion to alter judgment; finding as moot 33 motion to strike. Signed on 4/22/10 by District Judge Gary A. Fenner. (Mitchell, Lisa)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION ABE IGHALO, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 09-00032-CV-W-GAF ORDER Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Abe Ighalo's ("Plaintiff") Motion to Amend Judgment or to Make Additional Findings filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(b) and 59. (Doc. # 32). On March 3, 2010, the Clerk's Judgment was entered in this case after the Court granted Defendant Michael J. Astrue's ("Defendant") Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. ## 30, 31). Under both Fed. R. Civ. P. 52 and 59, Plaintiff had only twenty-eighty (28) days from March 3, 2010, the date judgment was entered, to file the present Motion. Plaintiff's Motion was not filed, however, until April 1, 2010, which falls outside the twenty-eight (28) day period. The Court is without power to grant Plaintiff an extension of time for filing. See Arnold v. Wood, 238 F.3d 992, 998 (8th Cir. 2001). Therefore, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion is DENIED.1 IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Gary A. Fenner Gary A. Fenner, Judge United States District Court DATED: April 22, 2010 Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Judgment as Untimely (Doc. # 33) has effectively been granted, but is formally DENIED as moot. 1 1

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?