Stephenson v. United States of America

Filing 7

ORDER denying 6 Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration, signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton.(DN) Modified on 9/17/2012 (DN). (cc to pltf)

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

11
12
13

16

ORDER DENYING
RECONSIDERATION

Plaintiff,

14
15

No. 12-CV-5581-RBL

DAVID C. STEPHENSON,

v.
(Dkt. #6)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

17
18
19

Petitioner requests reconsideration of the Court’s Order dismissing his petition for habeas

20

relief because it was filed well beyond the one-year limitation period. (Order, Dkt. #4.) In his

21

motion, Petitioner appears to argue that this Court lacks jurisdiction, although the motion itself is

22

difficult to understand, and the basis for the argument unclear. Petitioner states that the Court

23

issued judgment in his criminal case “without evidence in the record . . . of the existence of a

24

‘Notice of Acceptance’ of federal jurisdiction or equivalent, for the location of Robert B.

25

Leighton’s [sic] residence, providing conclusive evidence that Robert B. Leighton does not

26

qualify as a officer/judge/or employee of the federal government of the United States by failing

27

to reside on property lawfully acquired by the federal government . . . .” (Pet.’s Mot. for

28

Reconsideration at 1, Dkt. #6.)

Order - 1

1

Under Local Rule 7(h):

2

Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny such motions
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.

3
4

The Ninth Circuit has called reconsideration an “extraordinary remedy, to be used sparingly in
5

the interests of finality and conservation of judicial resources.” Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of
6

Bishop, 229 F.3d 877, 890 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting 12 James Wm. Moore et al., Moore’s
7

Federal Practice § 59.30[4] (3d ed. 2000). “Indeed, a motion for reconsideration should not be
8

granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is presented with newly
9

discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change in the controlling
10

law.” Id. (quoting 389 Orange Street Partners, 179 F.3d 656, 665 (9th Cir. 1999)).
11

The Court finds no grounds for reconsideration. The petition was dismissed because it
12

was outside the limitations period, and Petitioner does not suggest otherwise. The Court does
13

not understand Petitioner’s argument’s concerning jurisdiction.
14
15

Dated this 17th day of September 2012.
16
17
18
19

A
Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Order - 2