IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 1, 2012
MALIK JONES, PLAINTIFF,
A. DAVID, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
On April 9, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion asking that this court reconsider the March 29, 2012, order adopting the magistrate judge's December 28, 2011, findings and recommendations thereby dismissing defendant Holmes from this action.
A district 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 does not present newly discovered evidence suggesting this matter should not be dismissed as to Holmes. Furthermore, the Court finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the March 29, 2012, order adopting the magistrate judge's December 28, 2011, findings and recommendations is neither manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's April 9, 2012, motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 65) is DENIED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.