Opinion
1:21-cv-00252-RAL
03-03-2022
BRYAN ANGLE, II, Plaintif v. DR. MONTAG, Defndant
ORDER
RICHARD A. LANZILLO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintif has fled objections (ECF No. 22) to the Court's Order denying his Motion for Emergency Prelimina Injunction. See ECF No. 19. The Clerk of the Court initially treated Plaintif's motion as a appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals fr the Third Circuit. See ECF No. 23. Thereafer, Plaintif sent a letter to the Court stating that he did not intend to appeal but, instead, sought reconsideration of the Order by the undersigned U.S. Magistrate Judge or review by a U.S. District Judge. See ECF Nos. 25, 27. The Court frwaded this letter to the Clerk of the U.S. Court of Appeals fr the Third Circuit, which proceeded to dismiss the appeal without prejudice. ECF No. 26.
The Clerk of the Court of Appeals has closed Plaintifs appeal and reted the case to this Court. Because all paties have consented to the jurisdiction of a U.S. Magistrate Judge, Plaintif has no right to fle objections or otherwise seek review by a U.S. District Judge. See ECF Nos. 10, 12. Therefre, consistent with Plaintiff's request fr alterative relief, the Court will treat his objections as a motion fr reconsideration. In support of this relief, Plaintif again cited his "intellectual disability," "reading disability," and "computer illitera cy ]." ECF Nos. 25, 27. While these circumstances may warrat the Court's extension of deadlines and other accommodations to the Plaintif, they do not support the equitable relief Plaintif requested. See ECF No. 18. They also do not support reconsideration of the Court's Order.
Reconsideration is only appropriate where the movat demonstrates (1) a change in controlling law; (2) newly acquired ad previously unavailable evidence; (3) clear error of law or fct; or (4) manifst injustice. See Max's Seafood Cafe v. Quinteros, 176 F.3d 669, 677 (3d Cir. 1999). Plaintif has ofered no support fr any circumstance warranting reconsideration of t he Court's order denying his motion fr injunctive relief Accordingly, Plaintif's motion fr reconsideration is DENIED.
To the extent Plaintif needs additional time to comply wit ay Court deadline due to limited access to the law library or fr any oter proper reason, he may raise this in a motion fr extension of time.
IT IS SO ORDERED