IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 28, 2012
ANTONIO GORE, PETITIONER,
STEPHEN CAMBRA, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge
On April 25, 2012, petitioner filed a motion asking that this court reconsider the September 29, 2006 order adopting the magistrate judge's August 16, 2006 findings and recommendations thereby dismissing 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.
Petitioner does not present newly discovered evidence suggesting this matter should not be dismissed. Furthermore, the court finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the September 29, 2006 order adopting the magistrate judge's August 16, 2006 findings and recommendations is neither manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's April 25, 2012 request for relief from judgment is denied.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.