Opinion
No. CV-11-149-PHX-DGC (LOA).
July 12, 2011
ORDER
In an order dated March 24, 2011, the Court dismissed the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by Petitioner Victor Dema and his "Co-Petitioning child" on the ground that the Court is without jurisdiction over habeas actions challenging the custody of a minor child placed in foster homes pursuant to a state court order. Doc. 4. Petitioner Dema has filed a motion for reconsideration of that order. Doc. 6. Petitioner also has filed a motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal (Doc. 7) and a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 9).
Motions for reconsideration are disfavored and should be granted only in rare circumstances. Such a motion is denied "absent a showing of manifest error or a showing of new facts or legal authority that could not have been brought to [the Court's] attention earlier with reasonable diligence." LRCiv 7.2(g)(1); see Carroll v. Nakatani, 342 F.3d 934, 945 (9th Cir. 2003). Mere disagreement with an order is an insufficient basis for reconsideration. See Ross v. Arpaio, No. CV 05-4177-PHX-MHM, 2008 WL 1776502, at *2 (D. Ariz. Apr. 15, 2008).
Having carefully reviewed Petitioner Dema's motion, the Court finds no basis for reconsidering the March 24 order dismissing the habeas petition. In short, Petitioner's claims "challenging the state court's determinations regarding his parental rights and the custody of his child[] are not cognizable for federal habeas relief." Marquez v. Santa Cruz County Super. Ct., No. C 09-5397 WHA (PR), 2009 WL 4507747, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2009) (citing Lehman v. Lycoming County Children's Servs., 458 U.S. 502, 511-12 (1982)). The motion for reconsideration (Doc. 6) will be denied.
Petitioner's motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal (Doc. 7) will be granted. The notice of appeal filed on April 25, 2011 (Doc. 8) is deemed timely filed. See Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5). Petitioner's motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 9) will be denied as the Court finds the appeal to be not taken in good faith. See Fed.R.App.P. 24(a).
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The motion for reconsideration (Doc. 6) is denied.
2. The motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal (Doc. 7) is granted.
3. The motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 9) is denied.
4. No further motions for reconsideration shall be filed.