IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 3, 2012
TERRENCE L. DAVIS, PLAINTIFF,
SAC. CO. JAIL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff has filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's November 21, 2011 screening order. A court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law." Id. at 1263.
Plaintiff fails to point to anything suggesting reconsideration of the November 21, 2011 screening order is warranted. Plaintiff's motion is vague and contains pages of extraneous and confusing material. Plaintiff is cautioned that if he continues to file documents similar in content to this, the court will impose page limitations on the documents plaintiff may file, limit the number of documents plaintiff may file, or impose other sanctions.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's December 23, 2011 motion for reconsideration is denied.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.