Opinion
Civil Action No. 08-cv-02269-LTB-BNB.
July 9, 2009
ORDER
This matter arises on the plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration [Doc. # 145, filed 07/06/2009] (the "Motion"). The plaintiff "requests that pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) this Court reconsider its order granting Defendants Morrissey, Morales, Laff and Karpel's Motion to Dismiss." Motion, p. 2. The Motion misconstrues the status of the case. I have merely recommended that defendants Morrissey, Morales, Laff and Karpel's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. #56] be granted. Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Doc. #134, filed 6/12/2009] (the "Recommendation"). The district judge has not yet acted on my Recommendation. There is no order granting the motion to dismiss to be reconsidered.
In any event, a motion for reconsideration is not appropriate where, as here, the movant seeks merely to revisit issues already addressed or to advance arguments that could have been raised in prior briefing. Servants of the Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000); Van Skiver v. United States, 952 F.2d 1241, 1243-44 (10th Cir. 1991).
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED.