Harden v. Monninghoff et al

Filing 155

ORDER Denying 91 Motion for District Judge to Reconsider Order. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 6/28/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DL)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4

HAROLD HARDEN,

5

Plaintiff,

6
7

Case No. 2:14-cv-00377-APG-PAL
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION

v.
DR. MONNINGOFF and S/O AGULAR,

(ECF No. 91)

8

Defendants.

9
10

Plaintiff Harold Harden, a prisoner at Ely State Prison, filed this lawsuit alleging that in

11

April 2012, Dr. Monninghoff moved Harden to the mental health segregation unit without prior

12

notice and without his consent. ECF No. 17 at 4. He alleges he was forced to take drugs that

13

resulted in an allergic reaction. Id. He also alleges defendant Aguilar transported him to the

14

mental health segregation unit against his will and without any notice or opportunity to be heard.

15

Id.

16

Harden previously filed two motions for injunctive relief requesting that I transfer him to

17

obtain a second opinion or for surgery and that I direct he be treated for cysts that he contends are

18

not being treated at the prison. ECF Nos. 67, 77. I denied those motions because Harden

19

requested relief outside the issues in this lawsuit. ECF No. 87; De Beers Consol. Mines v. United

20

States, 325 U.S. 212, 220 (1945).

21

Harden moves for reconsideration, arguing that the requested injunctive relief is related to

22

the claims in his complaint because the cysts were caused by his allergic reaction to forced

23

medication. ECF No. 91. However, Harden presents no evidence to suggest any cysts he has

24

were caused by an allergic reaction to forced medication. He therefore has not presented any

25

basis for reconsideration. See Zimmerman v. City of Oakland, 255 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2001)

26

(stating a court may reconsider if (1) the moving party presents newly discovered evidence, (2)

27
28

1

“there is an intervening change in controlling law,” or (3) a prior order was clearly erroneous or

2

manifestly unjust); LR 59-1.

3
4
5

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff Harold Harden’s for reconsideration (ECF
No. 91) is DENIED.
DATED this 28th day of June, 2016.

6
7
8

ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2