From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Elias v. Kinross

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 17, 2022
2:17-cv-2106 WBS DB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2022)

Opinion

2:17-cv-2106 WBS DB

11-17-2022

KEIRON M. ELIAS, Plaintiff, v. J. KINROSS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

WILLIAM B. SHUBB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The court previously granted in part defendants' motion for summary judgment. (Docket No. 73.) Plaintiff has filed a document entitled “Objections to Courts [sic] Granting of Summary Judgment” (Docket No. 74), which the court will construe as a motion to reconsider under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Plaintiff presents no new facts or circumstances which would warrant reconsideration, but instead repeats arguments already raised on summary judgment. See Jackson v. Walker, 2:06-cv-2023 WBS GGH, 2009 WL 3584946 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2009) (an unsuccessful party may not use a motion to reconsider “to rehash arguments previously presented” or to present contentions which might have been raised prior to the challenged judgment) (citations omitted). Accordingly, plaintiff's request for reconsideration (Docket No. 74) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Elias v. Kinross

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 17, 2022
2:17-cv-2106 WBS DB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2022)
Case details for

Elias v. Kinross

Case Details

Full title:KEIRON M. ELIAS, Plaintiff, v. J. KINROSS, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 17, 2022

Citations

2:17-cv-2106 WBS DB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2022)