Opinion
No. CV 06-0834-PHX-SMM (LOA).
January 9, 2008
ORDER
Plaintiff Rick Alton Foley seeks reconsideration of the Court's Order that dismissed Plaintiff's claim against Senior Chaplain Sabbagh and allowed Plaintiff to proceed against Chaplain Broaderick (Doc. 49). Plaintiff argues that the Court erred in regards to a recitation of the relevant materials and that Sabbagh was not a party to the Motion to Dismiss (id.). Plaintiff maintains that the Court is biased against him and appears to be alleging that the Court's actions are designed to ensure that he will not prevail in the instant action (id.).
Motions for reconsideration should be granted only in rare circumstances. Defenders of Wildlife v. Browner, 909 F. Supp. 1342, 1351 (D.Ariz. 1995). "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." School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). Such motions should not be used for the purpose of asking a court "`to rethink what the court had already thought through — rightly or wrongly.'" Defenders of Wildlife, 909 F. Supp. at 1351 (quotingAbove the Belt, Inc. v. Mel Bohannon Roofing, Inc., 99 F.R.D. 99, 101 (E.D.Va. 1983)). The Court properly considered the evidence and facts in ruling on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, and Sabbagh joined in on the Motion to Dismiss originally filed only by Broaderick (Doc. #32 at 1, n. 1). Plaintiff has failed to establish that any of the aforementioned circumstances exist to warrant reconsideration fo the Court's Order. Therefore, Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration warrants denial.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 49).