Opinion
Civil Action No. 13-cv-01369-REB-BNB
2013-10-21
LAURENCE R. GOODMAN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO RECONSIDER
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on the petitioner's Motion for Leave To Make a Statement Likely To Manifest a Specific Cause of Action [#42 & 43] filed October 18, 2013. The motions docketed as [#42] and [#43] appear to be identical. I deny the motions.
"[#42]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.
The petitioner is acting pro se. Therefore, I construe his filings generously and with the leniency due pro se litigants, see Erickson v. Pardus , 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton , 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007); Hall v. Belmon , 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Haines v. Kerner , 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972)).
Recently, I entered an order [#40] granting the respondent's motion to dismiss, which resulted in the dismissal of this case. Judgment [#41] entered in favor of the respondent against the petitioner. In his most recent motions, the petitioner asserts that he has a valid cause of action and appears to seek reconsideration of my order dismissing this case.
The bases for granting reconsideration are extremely limited:
Grounds warranting a motion to reconsider include (1) an intervening change in the controlling law, (2) new evidence previously unavailable, and (3) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice. Thus, a motion for reconsideration is appropriate where the court has misapprehended the facts, a party's position, or the controlling law. It is not appropriate to revisit issues already addressed or advance arguments that could have been raised in prior briefing.Servants of the Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). The petitioner's most recent motions offer nothing suggesting that any of these factors are implicated here. Instead, he merely rehashes arguments previously advanced; arguments which are no more persuasive now than they were before.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the petitioner's Motion for Leave To Make a Statement Likely To Manifest a Specific Cause of Action [#42 & 43] filed October 18, 2013, are DENIED.
Dated October 21, 2013, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
________
Robert E. Blackburn
United States District Judge