Opinion
No. CV-17-00555-TUC-EJM
09-09-2019
Gilbert Mota, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant.
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). (Doc. 29).
Under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may file a "motion to alter or amend a judgment." The Ninth Circuit has explained that [s]ince specific grounds for a motion to amend or alter are not listed in the rule, the district court enjoys considerable discretion in granting or denying the motion." McDowell v. Calderon, 197 F.3d 1253, 1255 n.1 (9th Cir. 1999) (en banc) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks omitted). But amending a judgment after its entry remains "an extraordinary remedy which should be used sparingly." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). In general, there are four basic grounds upon which a Rule 59(e) motion may be granted: (1) if such motion is necessary to correct manifest errors of law or fact upon which the judgment rests; (2) if such motion is necessary to present newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence; (3) if such motion is necessary to prevent manifest injustice; or (4) if the amendment is justified by an intervening change in controlling law. Id.; Allstate Ins. Co. v. Herron, 634 F.3d 1101, 1112 (9th Cir. 2011). Rule 59(e) "may not be used to relitigate old matters, or to raise arguments or present evidence that could have been made prior to the entry of judgment." Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, 554 U.S. 471, 485 n.5 (2008) (citation omitted).
The Court's previous Order (Doc. 26) fully explained the Court's reasoning for its decision. The Court will not repeat itself again here. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying Defendant's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). (Doc. 29).
Dated this 9th day of September, 2019.
/s/_________
Eric J. Markovich
United States Magistrate Judge