From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pfizer, Inc. v. Stryker Corporation

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Feb 17, 2005
02 Civ. 8613 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2005)

Opinion

02 Civ. 8613 (LAK).

February 17, 2005


ORDER


A party making a motion for reconsideration "is not supposed to treat the court's initial decision as the opening of a dialogue in which that party may then use such a motion to advance new theories or adduce new evidence in response to the court's rulings," De Los Santos v. Fingerson, No. 97 Civ. 3972 (MBM), 2001 WL 788781, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 12, 1998), much less rehash arguments already made and rejected. That is just what defendants have done. Their motion for reconsideration is denied.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Pfizer, Inc. v. Stryker Corporation

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Feb 17, 2005
02 Civ. 8613 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2005)
Case details for

Pfizer, Inc. v. Stryker Corporation

Case Details

Full title:PFIZER, INC., et ano., Plaintiffs, v. STRYKER CORPORATION, et ano.…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Feb 17, 2005

Citations

02 Civ. 8613 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2005)

Citing Cases

Robinson v. Online

“A motion for reconsideration should be granted only when the defendant identifies ‘an intervening change of…

In re September 11 Litigation

None of Vandell's conclusions in that declaration mentioned negative fair market value. A new argument is not…