Monroe v. Walker et al

Filing 40

ORDER denying Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 38 ). Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 5/9/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

RONALD MONROE,

Case No. 3:14-cv-00515-MMD-WGC
Plaintiff,

10
v.
11
12
13

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER WALKER, et
al.,

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
WILLIAM G. COBB

Defendants.

14
15

The Court dismissed this action without prejudice pursuant to LSR 2-2 and Fed.

16

R. Civ. P. 41(b) because Plaintiff failed to notify the Court of his change of address and

17

had not made contact with Defendant or the Court since he filed his last notice of change

18

of address in October 2015. (ECF No. 37.) Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for

19

reconsideration (ECF No. 38) which Defendant opposes (ECF No. 39).

20

A motion to reconsider must set forth “some valid reason why the court should

21

reconsider its prior decision” and set “forth facts or law of a strongly convincing nature to

22

persuade the court to reverse its prior decision.” Frasure v. United States, 256

23

F.Supp.2d 1180, 1183 (D. Nev. 2003). Reconsideration is appropriate if this Court “(1) is

24

presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial

25

decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.”

26

Sch. Dist. No. 1J v. Acands, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993).

27

Plaintiff asserts that he was admitted to “UMC with gun shot wounds” on May 10

28

and after admissions to other facilities was discharged on December 5, 2016. (ECF No.

1

38.) Plaintiff did not provide the year of his admission to UMC, but presumably he was

2

admitted on May 10, 2016, because Plaintiff filed previous notices of changes to his

3

address in 2015. (See ECF Nos. 23, 24, 27.) Even accepting Plaintiff’s explanation that

4

he was unable to pursue this case from May 10, 2016, to December 5, 2016, Plaintiff still

5

failed to notify the Court of his change of address before his May 10, 2016, admission.

6

On April 5, 2016, mail sent to Plaintiff was returned as undeliverable. (ECF No. 32.)

7

Moreover, Plaintiff filed a notice of his change of address on Novembre 28, 2016, but he

8

did not file an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, which

9

was not adopted unil February 15, 2017.

10
11
12

It is therefore ordered that Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 38) is
denied.
DATED THIS 9th day of May 2017.

13
14
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2