Opinion
2:19-CV-2218-WBS-DMC-P
10-04-2022
WILLIAM ERIK MONROE, Plaintiff, v. G. MORTELL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, ECF No. 42, of the undersigned's April 4, 2022, adopting the Magistrate Judge's amended findings and recommendations.
The Court may grant reconsideration under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59(e) and 60. Under Rule 60(a), the Court may grant reconsideration of final judgments and any order based on clerical mistakes. Relief under this rule can be granted on the Court's own motion and at any time. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a). Under Rule 60(b), the Court may grant reconsideration of a final judgment and any order based on: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered within ten days of entry of judgment; and (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct of an opposing party. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1)-(3). A motion for reconsideration on any of these grounds must be brought within one year of entry of judgment or the order being challenged. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(c)(1). Under Rule 60(b), the Court may also grant reconsideration if: (1) the judgment is void; (2) the judgement has been satisfied, released, or discharged, an earlier judgment has been reversed or vacated, or applying the judgment prospectively is no longer equitable; and (3) any other reason that justifies relief. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4)-(6). A motion for reconsideration on any of these grounds must be brought “within a reasonable time.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(c)(1).
Having reviewed Plaintiff's motion and Defendants' opposition thereto, the Court does not find that reconsideration is warranted.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, ECF No. 42, is denied.