Opinion
Civil Action 5:23-cv-184 (MTT)
12-12-2023
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF WARNER ROBINS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE
Plaintiff Benjamin Franklin moves for reconsideration of the Court's December 6, 2023 order granting in part and denying in part his motion to compel. Docs. 12; 13.
Pursuant to Local Rule 7.6, “Motions for Reconsideration shall not be filed as a matter of routine practice.” M.D. Ga. L.R. 7.6. Indeed, “reconsideration of a previous order is an extraordinary remedy to be employed sparingly.” Bingham v. Nelson, 2010 WL 339806 at *1 (M.D. Ga. Jan. 21, 2010) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). It “is appropriate only if the movant demonstrates (1) that there has been an intervening change in the law, (2) that new evidence has been discovered which was not previously available to the parties in the exercise of due diligence, or (3) that the court made a clear error of law.” Id. “In order to demonstrate clear error, the party moving for reconsideration must do more than simply restate his prior arguments, and any arguments which the party inadvertently failed to raise earlier are deemed waived.” McCoy v. Macon Water Authority, 966 F.Supp. 1209, 1222-23 (M.D. Ga. 1997).
Franklin asserts that the Court did not fully consider his motion to compel. Doc. 13 at 2. However, the Court did, and Franklin provides no basis that it made a clear error of law in ruling on that motion. Accordingly, his motion for reconsideration (Doc. 13) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.