Barren v. Dzurenda et al

Filing 57

ORDER Denying 56 Motion for Reconsideration re 54 Order, Add and Terminate Parties. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 1/11/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - YAW)

Case 2:19-cv-00142-APG-VCF Document 57 Filed 01/11/22 Page 1 of 2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 DONALD ROTSIN BARREN,
4

Plaintiff

Case No.: 2:19-cv-00142-APG-VCF
Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration

5 v.

[ECF No. 56]

6 JAMES DZURENDA, et al.,
7
8

Defendants
Plaintiff Donald Barren moves for reconsideration of my prior order dismissing various

9 defendants because of Barren’s failure to timely serve them.
10

Reconsideration may be appropriate “if the district court (1) is presented with newly

11 discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or
12 (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Sch. Dist. No. 1J v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d
13 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). A district court may also reconsider its decision if “other, highly
14 unusual, circumstances” warrant it. Id. As the movant, Barren “must set forth facts or law of a
15 strongly convincing nature to induce the court to reverse its prior decision.” United States v.
16 Westlands Water Dist., 134 F. Supp. 2d 1111, 1131 (E.D. Cal. 2001). A motion for
17 reconsideration “must not repeat arguments already presented unless (and only to the extent)
18 necessary to explain controlling, intervening law or to argue new facts.” LR 59-1(b); Backlund v.
19 Barnhart, 778 F.2d 1386, 1388 (9th Cir. 1985).
20
21 order.
22 / / / /
23 / / / /

Barren has not presented sufficient evidence or reasons for me to reconsider my prior

Case 2:19-cv-00142-APG-VCF Document 57 Filed 01/11/22 Page 2 of 2

1

I THEREFORE ORDER that plaintiff Donald Barren’s motion for reconsideration (ECF

2 No. 56) is denied.
3

DATED this 11th day of January, 2022.

4
5

ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

2