UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 2, 2011
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (ECF No. 9)
Plaintiff Michael Terry ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 26, 2011, Plaintiff filed an opposition seeking reconsideration of the order denying appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 9.)
"A motion for reconsideration should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the court is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change in the controlling law," and it "may not be used to raise arguments or present evidence for the first time when they could reasonably have been raised earlier in the litigation." Marlyn Nutraceuticals, Inc. v. Mucos Pharma GmbH & Co., 571 F.3d 873, 880 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal quotations marks and citations omitted) (emphasis in original).
Plaintiff's motion is devoid of any ground entitling Plaintiff to reconsideration of the Court's order. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion, filed July 26, 2011, is HEREBY DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.