Holt v. 99 Cent Store of Reno, NV et al
Filing
14
ORDER denying ECF Nos. 12 Motion for Hearing, 13 Motion for District Judge to Reconsider Order and 11 Plaintiff's Objection (construed as a motion for reconsideration). Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 1/5/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
MICHAEL L. HOLT,
10
11
12
Case No. 3:17-cv-00051-MMD-VPC
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
99 CENT STORE OF RENO, NV, et al.,
Defendants.
13
14
15
The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and
16
dismissed the second amended complaint with prejudice, without leave to amend. (ECF
17
No. 9.) In response, Plaintiff filed an objection (ECF No. 11), a motion for hearing (ECF
18
No. 12) and a motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 13.)
19
A motion to reconsider must set forth “some valid reason why the court should
20
reconsider its prior decision” and set “forth facts or law of a strongly convincing nature to
21
persuade the court to reverse its prior decision.” Frasure v. United States, 256 F.Supp.2d
22
1180, 1183 (D. Nev. 2003). Reconsideration is appropriate if this Court “(1) is presented
23
with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was
24
manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Sch. Dist. No.
25
1J v. Acands, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993).
26
Plaintiff asks for a hearing, but he offers no valid reason for the Court to reconsider
27
its decision to dismiss his seconded amended complaint. Accordingly, the Court will deny
28
reconsideration.
1
It is therefore ordered that Plaintiff’s motion for hearing (ECF No. 12) and motion
2
for reconsideration (ECF No. 13) are denied. Plaintiff’s objection (ECF No. 11) is construed
3
as a motion for reconsideration and is also denied.
4
DATED THIS 5th day of January 2018.
5
6
7
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?