Burton v. Shinseki et al

Filing 20

ORDER, For the reasons stated above, pltff's submission dated 11/9/11, entitled "Pltff's Objection to Judge Townes['] Order dated 11/4/11," is construed as a motion for reconsideration pursuant to FRCP 60(b). That motion is d enied. If pltff's complaint in this action raised claims not already raised in Burton v. Shinseki, EDNY Docket #10-cv-5318, pltff may move to amend the complaint in that case pursuant to FRCP 15(a). Alternatively, pltff may appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals within 30 days of entry of this Order. (Ordered by Judge Sandra L. Townes on 11/18/2011) c/m (Galeano, Sonia)

FILED
IN CLERK'S OFFICE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

-----------------------------------------------------------X

ANN BURTON,

Plaintiff,
-against-

( (\

: DIS~~~TZC~U;~:, D ~~ \\\
N~
13ROOKLYN OFFICt

~

ORDER

(LY

11-CV-2030 (SLT)(LB)
ERIC K. SHINSEKI, eta/.,
Defendants

-----------------------------------------------------------X
TOWNES, United States District Judge:
This Court is in receipt of a submission addressed to this Court and dated November 9,
2011, in which plaintiff prose Ann Burton voices objections to this Court's November 4, 2011,
order (the "Prior Order") dismissing this action as duplicative of Burton v. Shinseki, E.D.N. Y.
Docket No. 10-CV-5318. Although plaintiffs submission is entitled "Plaintiffs Objection to
Judge Townes[') Order dated November 4, 2011," this Court- in keeping with its duty to
construe prose submissions liberally, see, e.g., Burgos v. Hopkins, 14 F.3d 787, 790 (2d Cir.
1994)- will construe it as a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.
"The standard for granting such a motion is strict, and reconsideration will generally be
denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court
overlooked- matters, in other words, that might reasonably be expected to alter the conclusion
reached by the court." Shrader v. CSXTransp., Inc., 70 F.3d 255, 257 (2d Cir. 1995) (citing
cases). "[A] motion for reconsideration is not an additional opportunity to reargue claims
previously denied." United States v. Sessa, Nos. 92-CR-351 (ARR), 97-CV-2079 (ARR), 2011
WL 867175, at *I (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2011).
Plaintiff does not cite to any cases or mention any facts not previously discussed. Rather,
plaintiff asserts that this case does not relate to the same subject matter as No. 10-CV -5318. She

also expresses confusion as to how a complaint which is not an exact duplicate of another can
nonetheless be found to be "duplicative."
This Court already held that plaintiffs complaint in this action pertained to the same
subject matter as No. 10-CV-5318 in that it repeated or amplified many of the same allegations
contained either in the amended complaint in that case or in the proposed addendums. See

Burton v. Shinseki, No. 11-CV-2030 (SLT)(LB), slip op. at 3 (E.D.N.Y. June 21, 2011). In
addition, this Court already explained that an action raising ''the same subject in the same court,
against the same defendant at the same time" as a previous action can be dismissed as
duplicative, even if the action is not exactly the same as the prior action. See id. at 4 (quoting

Curtis v. Citibank, NA., 226 F.3d 133, 138-39 (2d Cir. 2000). Since plaintiff is essentially
seeking to relitigate issues already decided, reconsideration is denied.

CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, plaintiffs submission dated November 9, 2011, entitled
"Plaintiff's Objection to Judge Townes['} Order dated November 4, 2011," is construed as a
motion for reconsideration pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). That motion is denied. If
plaintiff's complaint in this action raised claims not already raised in Burton v. Shinseki,
E.D.N.Y. Docket No. 10-CV-5318, plaintiff may move to amend the complaint in that case
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Alternatively, plaintiff may appeal to the Second Circuit Court
of Appeals within thirty days of entry of this Order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(vi).
SO ORDERED.

(SANDRA L. TOWNES
United States District Judge
Dated: November ji?, 2011
Brooklyn, New York
2