Opinion
No. CIV S-11-2436 CKD P.
October 26, 2011
ORDER
On October 24, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion asking that this court reconsider its October 11, 2011 dismissal of this action.
A district court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law." Id. at 1263.
Plaintiff does not present newly discovered evidence suggesting this matter should not be dismissed. Furthermore, the court finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the October 12, 2011 order dismissing this action is neither manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous as plaintiff still fails to point to anything indicating he has an actionable 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim arising from police officers' failure to return a DVD plaintiff mailed to them.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's October 24, 2011 motion for reconsideration is denied.