Opinion
Case No. 2:15-CV-12914
02-23-2016
TAJUAN MARNEZ WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. SHERMAN CAMPBELL, Respondent
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
On February 1, 2016, petitioner's motion to disqualify the Court from adjudicating his habeas petition was denied. Petitioner has now filed a motion for reconsideration. For the reasons stated below, the motion for reconsideration is denied.
U.S. Dist.Ct. Rules, E.D. Mich. 7.1 (h) allows a party to file a motion for reconsideration. However, a motion for reconsideration which presents the same issues already ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, will not be granted. Ford Motor Co. v. Greatdomains.com, Inc., 177 F. Supp. 2d 628, 632 (E.D. Mich. 2001). A motion for reconsideration should be granted if the movant demonstrates a palpable defect by which the court and the parties have been misled and that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof. MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 79 F. Supp. 2d 768, 797 (E.D. Mich. 1999). A palpable defect is a defect that is obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest, or plain. Witzke v. Hiller, 972 F. Supp. 426, 427 (E.D. Mich. 1997).
Petitioner's motion for reconsideration will be denied, because peitioner is merely presenting issues which were already ruled upon by this Court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, when the Court denied the motion to disqualify. See Hence v. Smith, 49 F. Supp. 2d 549, 553 (E.D. Mich. 1999).
ORDER
Based upon the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration [Dkt. # 12] is DENIED.
s/ Nancy G. Edmunds
HON. NANCY G. EDMUNDS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated:February 23, 2016