UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 26, 2012
RAYMOND BRASSARD, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Larry Alan Burns United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT JUDGE
The Court dismissed Okereke's complaint on February 14, 2012 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), finding that it was both unintelligible and failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Okereke subsequently filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).
The motion has the same problems as Okereke's complaint. It is heavy on rhetoric and prose but utterly lacking in substance and coherence. Under Rule 59(e), a district court may only alter or amend a judgment if: (1) it is presented with newly discovered evidence;
(2) it committed clear error or made an initial decision that was manifestly unjust; or (3) there has been an intervening change in controlling law. United Nat. Ins. Co. v. Spectrum Worldwide, Inc., 555 F.3d 772, 780 (9th Cir. 2009). Okereke has not shown that any of these conditions are met here. Instead, the most that can be said of Okereke's motion is that it is legible, and anyway, there is no argument available to Okereke that can overcome the immunity to which Judge Brassard is entitled.
The Court would also note that the notice page of Okereke's motion is signed by Chukwuma E Azubuko, not Okereke. Azubuko is a serial pro se litigant in this Court whose cases have consistently been dismissed for failure to state a claim. The motion to alter or amend the judgment is DENIED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.