Opinion
No. CV06-1235-PHX-DGC
08-06-2012
Paul Melcher, et al., Plaintiffs, v. City of San Luis, et al., Defendants.
WO
ORDER
Defendants filed a motion on June 1, 2012, seeking to re-open this case for the purpose of amending the judgment to add an award of costs. Doc. 151. The motion has been fully briefed. Docs. 151, 156, 157. The Court will deny the motion as untimely.
Defendants bring their motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58(b)(1), which governs the entry of judgments for costs. That rule does not provide for the reopening of judgments, and Defendants cite no case law suggesting that judgments can be re-opened under Rule 58.
Rule 59 governs the amending of judgments, but it places a strict time limit on motions seeking such relief. Rule 59(e) states that "[a] motion to alter or amend a judgment must be filed no later than 28 days after the entry of the judgment." Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). The Court cannot extend this time period. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(2). Defendants could have filed a motion within 28 days of the judgment on March 13, 2008, noting that they had sought a recovery of costs and asking the Court to amend the judgment to include any costs ultimately awarded. Doc. 122. Because Defendants' failed to do so, their motion untimely.
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' motion to re-open the case is denied.
___________
David G. Campbell
United States District Judge