Green v. Sneath et al
ORDER denying pltf's motion for reconsideration 121 of ct's 6/15/11 order 112 . (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 07/19/11. (ki)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DET. SNEATH, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09-CV-0154
AND NOW, this 19th day of July, 2011, upon consideration of plaintiff’s
motion (Doc. 121), in which he seeks reconsideration of this court’s order of
June 15, 2011 (Doc. 112), granting defendants’ motion for an enlargement of time to
file a pretrial memorandum and extend the trial date, and it appearing that plaintiff
fails to demonstrate one of three major grounds for reconsideration ((1) an
intervening change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence [not
available previously]; [or], (3) the need to correct clear error [of law] or prevent
manifest injustice.’”)), North River Ins. Co. v. Cigna Reinsurance Co., 52 F.3d 1194,
1218 (3d Cir. 1995) (citations omitted), and that he simply takes issue with the
court’s decision to grant defendants’ motion as permitted by Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 6(b)(1)(B)(allows Court, in its discretion, to enlarge the time period after
a deadline has passed, for good cause and where the party had failed to act because
of excusable neglect), see Waye v. First Citizen’s Nat’l Bank, 846 F. Supp. 310, 314
(M.D. Pa.) (“A motion for reconsideration is not to be used to reargue matters
already argued and disposed of.”), aff’d, 31 F.3d 1174 (3d Cir. 1994); see also
Database America, Inc. v. Bellsouth Adver. & Publ’g Corp., 825 F. Supp. 1216, 1220
(D. N.J. 1993) (citations omitted) (“A party seeking reconsideration must show more
than a disagreement with the Court’s decision, and ‘recapitulation of the cases and
arguments considered by the court before rendering its original decision fails to
carry the moving party’s burden.’”), it is hereby ORDERED that the motion (Doc.
121) is DENIED.
S/ Christopher C. Conner
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
United States District Judge
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?