Opinion
CAUSE NO. 1:07-CV-301 RM.
May 7, 2008
OPINION and ORDER
On April 22, 2008, the court granted the motions to dismiss of defendants Experian Information Solutions, Inc. and Trans Union LLC and the motion of plaintiff Christopher Washington to dismiss his claims against Verizon Wireless, the sole remaining defendant. Judgment in favor of the defendants was entered on April 23. Mr. Washington filed a motion, on April 30, asking that the judgment be set aside and that he "receive some relief" from the defendants.
Mr. Washington's filing doesn't include a certificate of service required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(a) indicating that he served his motion on the defendants, and the motion doesn't indicate that the request for reconsideration is made pursuant to any one of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Had Mr. Washington properly filed his motion with a certificate of service, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) would govern,United States v. Deutsch, 981 F.2d 299, 300 (7th Cir. 1993), but he wouldn't be entitled to relief he requests.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) requires Mr. Washington to "clearly establish a manifest error of law or an intervening change in controlling law or present newly discovered evidence."Roma v. Gulf Stream Coach, Inc., 250 F.2d 1119, 1121 n. 3 (7th Cir. 2001). Mr. Washington hasn't identified a change in controlling law, presented newly discovered evidence, or identified any manifest error of law. His statement that he wasn't aware of the applicable statutes is insufficient to "clearly establish a manifest error of law" as required by Rule 59(e). See also Perez v. Autozone, Inc., No. 07C1955, 2008 WL 961583, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 8, 2008) ("The losing party's disappointment does not create a 'manifest error.'").
Mr. Washington's motion to set aside the judgment [docket # 89] is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.