Mitchell, Jr. v. Department of Corrections et al
Filing
72
ORDER denying 60 Motion for Magistrate Judge to Reconsider Magistrate Judge Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 10/20/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10
DONALD E. MITCHELL, JR.,
11
Plaintiff(s),
12
vs.
13
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
14
Defendant(s).
15
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 2:16-cv-00037-RFB-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 60)
16
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the order denying his
17
discovery motions. Docket No. 60. Defendants filed a response in opposition. Docket No. 64. No
18
reply was filed. Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. Local Rule 59-1(b). The Local Rules
19
provide the applicable standards in addressing whether the Court should reconsider an interlocutory
20
order, indicating that reconsideration may be appropriate if (1) there is newly discovered evidence that
21
was not available when the original motion or response was filed, (2) the Court committed clear error
22
or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) there is an intervening change in controlling law.
23
Local Rule 59-1(a).1
24
//
25
26
27
28
1
“The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not contain a provision governing the review of
interlocutory orders.” Philips v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 290 F.R.D. 615, 665 (D. Nev. 2013). Defendants quote
Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which establishes the standards for seeking relief from a
final order or judgment. Docket No. 64 at 3. As Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of an interlocutory order,
the Court applies Local Rule 59-1(a).
1
Having failed to meet these standards, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
DATED: October 20, 2017
4
______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?