Opinion
CASE NO. C06-1256C.
May 8, 2007
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motion to file an overlength motion for reconsideration (Dkt. No. 56) and the motion for reconsideration itself (Dkt. No. 57). Having considered the motions, the Court hereby finds and rules as follows.
Motions for reconsideration are governed by Local Civil Rule 7(h), which provides in pertinent part that "[m]otions for reconsideration are disfavored" and that the Court "will ordinarily deny such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to [the Court's] attention earlier with reasonable diligence." Local Rules W.D. Wash. CR 7(h)(1). Despite this standard, Plaintiff concedes that she raises no new facts or legal authority by explaining that she did not previously argue specific facts as they are now presented "due to the volume of materials in this case and space and time limitations." (Pl.'s Mot. for Overlength Brief 2.) Lengthy records and dispositive motions briefing schedules are not grounds for reconsideration. Nor does Plaintiff's 13-page brief (Dkt. No. 57) point to any alleged manifest error in the Court's prior Order (Dkt. No. 55). Instead, Plaintiff seeks to present again claims that the Court has already thoroughly considered. Plaintiff's apparent disagreement with the outcome of this litigation is not sufficient to justify reconsideration. Because Plaintiff has failed to make the required Rule 7(h)(1) showing, this Court will not reconsider its prior disposition of her claims. Accordingly, her motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Because the Court has considered Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration on the merits, her motion regarding its length is STRICKEN as MOOT. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter final judgment in this case.
SO ORDERED.