Filed: Jul. 16, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 16, 2012
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge. Presently before the court is plaintiff Robin M. Lee's motion for reconsideration. Doc. #16. Defendant TeleCheck Services, Inc. (incorrectly named as TeleCheck Corp.) has filed an opposition (doc. #18), Lee has not replied. Motions for reconsideration "should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances." Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877 , 890 (9th Cir. 2000). "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is prese
Summary: ORDER JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge. Presently before the court is plaintiff Robin M. Lee's motion for reconsideration. Doc. #16. Defendant TeleCheck Services, Inc. (incorrectly named as TeleCheck Corp.) has filed an opposition (doc. #18), Lee has not replied. Motions for reconsideration "should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances." Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877 , 890 (9th Cir. 2000). "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presen..
More
ORDER
JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.
Presently before the court is plaintiff Robin M. Lee's motion for reconsideration. Doc. #16. Defendant TeleCheck Services, Inc. (incorrectly named as TeleCheck Corp.) has filed an opposition (doc. #18), Lee has not replied.
Motions for reconsideration "should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances." Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877, 890 (9th Cir. 2000). "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." School Dist. No. 1J v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993); Kona, 229 F.3d at 890; see also FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e); FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b). A motion for reconsideration "may not be used to raise arguments or present evidence for the first time when they would reasonably have been raised earlier in the litigation." Kona, 229 F.3d at 890.
Lee has failed to establish any of the three factors for reconsideration. Instead, the motion accuses the court of favoritism and inappropriately applying the law. Upon review of the docket, the court finds that dismissal was appropriate and that no grounds for reconsideration exist.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff Robin M. Lee's motion to reconsider (doc. #16) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
