LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE GROUP v. PANELIZED STRUCTURES, INC., 2:10-cv-01951-MMD-PAL. (2013)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20130620d50
Visitors: 18
Filed: Jun. 19, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 19, 2013
Summary: ORDER (Def.'s Motion to Amend/Correct Clerk's Judgment — dkt. no. 202) MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge. Before the Court is Defendant Panelized Structures, Inc.'s ("Defendant") Motion to Amend/Correct Clerk's Judgment. (Dkt. no. 202.) Although the title of Defendant's Motion suggests that Defendant seeks the correction of an inaccuracy within the Clerk's Judgment, Defendant actually moves the Court to reconsider its prior Order (dkt. no. 89), in which the Court dismissed Defendant's counterclai
Summary: ORDER (Def.'s Motion to Amend/Correct Clerk's Judgment — dkt. no. 202) MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge. Before the Court is Defendant Panelized Structures, Inc.'s ("Defendant") Motion to Amend/Correct Clerk's Judgment. (Dkt. no. 202.) Although the title of Defendant's Motion suggests that Defendant seeks the correction of an inaccuracy within the Clerk's Judgment, Defendant actually moves the Court to reconsider its prior Order (dkt. no. 89), in which the Court dismissed Defendant's counterclaim..
More
ORDER
(Def.'s Motion to Amend/Correct Clerk's Judgment — dkt. no. 202)
MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendant Panelized Structures, Inc.'s ("Defendant") Motion to Amend/Correct Clerk's Judgment. (Dkt. no. 202.) Although the title of Defendant's Motion suggests that Defendant seeks the correction of an inaccuracy within the Clerk's Judgment, Defendant actually moves the Court to reconsider its prior Order (dkt. no. 89), in which the Court dismissed Defendant's counterclaims. Defendant has previously filed a Motion for Reconsideration relating to this Order (dkt. no. 90), which the Court denied (dkt. no. 112). Defendant also filed a separate lawsuit advancing the same theories presented in that Motion for Reconsideration and in the instant Motion. (Panelized Structures, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Group et al., No. 2:12-cv-00264-MMD-PAL, Dkt. No. 1.) That suit was dismissed by the Court's Order entered March 15, 2013. (Id. at dkt. no. 41.)
This third attempt to convince the Court to rescind its prior Order is inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. The Defendant's Motion is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
