IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 6, 2012
JIMMIE STEPHEN, PETITIONER,
F. ZHANG, ET AL., RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
On September 19, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion asking that the Court reconsider its March 1, 2012, order adopting the magistrate judge's December 1, 2011, 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.
Plaintiff 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 March 1, 2012, order adopting the December 1, 2011, findings and recommendations is neither manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's September 19, 2012, motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 160) is denied.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.