Opinion
Civil Action No. 06-cv-01061-ZLW.
July 27, 2006
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RECONSIDER
Plaintiff Tony E. Powell filed pro se on July 21, 2006, a motion titled "Motion to Alter or Amend Judgement [sic]." Mr. Powell asks the Court to reconsider and vacate the Court's Order and Judgment of Dismissal filed on July 14, 2006. The Court must construe the motion to reconsider liberally because Mr. Powell is proceeding pro se. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). For the reasons stated below, the motion to reconsider will be denied.
A litigant subject to an adverse judgment, and who seeks reconsideration by the district court of that adverse judgment, may "file either a motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) or a motion seeking relief from the judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)." Van Skiver v. United States, 952 F.2d 1241, 1243 (10th Cir. 1991). Mr. Powell filed the motion to reconsider within ten days after the Order and Judgment of Dismissal. Therefore, the Court will consider the motion to reconsider pursuant to Rule 59(e). See Van Skiver, 952 F.2d at 1243.
The Court dismissed the complaint and the instant action without prejudice for failure to cure the designated deficiencies. The Court specifically determined that Mr. Powell failed to submit a certified account statement. The reasons for the dismissal are discussed in detail in the Order and Judgment of Dismissal filed on July 14, 2006.
Upon consideration of the motion to reconsider and the entire file, the Court finds that Mr. Powell fails to demonstrate some reason why the Court should reconsider and vacate the order to dismiss this action. The three major grounds that justify reconsideration are: (1) an intervening change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence; and (3) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice. See Shields v. Shetler, 120 F.R.D. 123, 126 (D. Colo. 1988).
Mr. Powell does not allege the existence of any new law or evidence and the Court remains convinced that Mr. Powell failed to submit a properly certified copy of his trust fund account statement. Therefore, the motion to reconsider will be denied. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the motion titled "Motion to Alter or Amend Judgement [sic]" that Plaintiff Tony E. Powell filed pro se on July 21, 2006, and which the Court has treated as a motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), is denied.