Balan v. Tesla Motors Inc
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 76 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (SR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
CASE NO. C19-67 MJP
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
TESLA MOTORS INC.,
This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt.
No. 76) of the Court’s April 22, 2021 Order Closing the Case (Dkt. No. 75). The Motion is
Plaintiff seeks reconsideration, arguing: (1) The Court’s Order fails to address the issue
of the material breach of the arbitration agreement or the unconscionability of JAMS unwritten
rules toward pro se litigants; (2) the Ninth Circuit did not instruct the Court to close the case; and
(3) the Order cites three allegedly defamatory statements, when the Ninth Circuit only addressed
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 1
Motions for reconsideration are disfavored and ordinarily will not be granted “in the
absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal
authority which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence.”
LCR 7(h)(1). Plaintiff has failed to make such a showing. Although Plaintiff is correct that the
Court cited three defamatory statements when the Ninth Circuit only discussed two, the Court
concludes that this was a typographical error, and not manifest error. And because the Ninth
Circuit’s recent opinion devested the Court of jurisdiction in this matter, the Court may not
consider Plaintiff’s remaining arguments about the arbitration agreement, and closing the case
was proper. The Court therefore DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration.
The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.
Dated April 26, 2021.
Marsha J. Pechman
United States Senior District Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 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?