Robotic Vision Techs. LLC v. Shafi

Full title: ROBOTIC VISION TECHNOLOGIES LLC, and FREDERICK WEIDINGER, Plaintiffs, v…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 10, 2014

Case Number: 11-12909 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 10, 2014)

Opinion

Case Number: 11-12909

03-10-2014

ROBOTIC VISION TECHNOLOGIES LLC, and FREDERICK WEIDINGER, Plaintiffs, v. ADIL SHAFI, Defendant.

Victoria A. Roberts

Honorable Victoria A. Roberts

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' AMENDED

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (DOC. # 57)

Before the Court is Defendant's Amended Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's February 18, 2014, Order Appointing Special Master.

Local Rule 7.1(h)(3) provides the Court's standard of review:

Generally, and without restricting the court's discretion, the court will not grant motions for ... reconsideration that merely present the same issues ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication. The movant must not only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the court and the parties and other persons entitled to be heard on the motion have been misled but also show that correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.

E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(h)(3). Palpable defects are those which are "obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest or plain." Mich. Dep't of Treasury v. Michalec, 181 F. Supp. 2d 731, 734 (E.D. Mich. 2002). "It is an exception to the norm for the Court to grant a motion for reconsideration." Maiberger v. City of Livonia, 724 F. Supp. 2d 759, 780 (E.D. Mich. 2010). "[A]bsent a significant error that changes the outcome of a ruling on a motion, the Court will not provide a party with an opportunity to relitigate issues already decided." Id.

The Court finds that Defendant's arguments do not demonstrate palpable defects, which if corrected would result in a different disposition of the Court's order.

Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. Defendant must deliver to Dr. Hollaar a retainer of $5,000 no later than March 14, 2014; failure to do so will result in contempt of court and issuance of sanctions. If he has not already done so, Dr. Hollaar must compare the Complaint to the Court's Order Appointing Special Master.

IT IS ORDERED.

__________

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge
The undersigned certifies that a copy of this document was served on the attorneys of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on March 10, 2014. Linda Vertriest
Deputy Clerk