Opinion
No. CIV S-05-0383 LKK KJM P.
October 14, 2008
ORDER
On September 10, 2008, petitioner filed a document titled "petition for rehearing." The court construes this as a motion for reconsideration of the August 20, 2008 order adopting the magistrate judge's June 4, 2008 findings and recommendations thereby dismissing this action.
A district court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). "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." Id. at 1263.
Plaintiff does not present newly discovered evidence suggesting this matter should not be dismissed. Furthermore, the court finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the August 20, 2008 order adopting the June 4, 2008 findings and recommendations is neither manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's September 10, 2008 "petition for rehearing" is denied.