Filed: Sep. 15, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 15, 2015
Summary: ORDER MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#62) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#63) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#64) CAM FERENBACH , Magistrate Judge . On September 14, 2015, Mr. Qazi filed three motions for reconsideration. (Docs. #62, #63, #64). Mr. Qazi's motions for reconsideration reiterate the same arguments that were previously presented to the court. This is inappropriate. Generally, "[a] motion for reconsideration must set forth the following: (1) some valid reason why the court should re
Summary: ORDER MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#62) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#63) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#64) CAM FERENBACH , Magistrate Judge . On September 14, 2015, Mr. Qazi filed three motions for reconsideration. (Docs. #62, #63, #64). Mr. Qazi's motions for reconsideration reiterate the same arguments that were previously presented to the court. This is inappropriate. Generally, "[a] motion for reconsideration must set forth the following: (1) some valid reason why the court should rev..
More
ORDER
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#62)
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#63)
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (#64)
CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.
On September 14, 2015, Mr. Qazi filed three motions for reconsideration. (Docs. #62, #63, #64). Mr. Qazi's motions for reconsideration reiterate the same arguments that were previously presented to the court. This is inappropriate.
Generally, "[a] motion for reconsideration must set forth the following: (1) some valid reason why the court should revisit its prior order, and (2) facts or law of a `strongly convincing nature' in support of reversing the prior decision." Henry, 2010 WL 3636278, at *1 (citing Frasure v. United States, 256 F.Supp.2d 1180, 1183 (D.Nev.2003)). Moreover, "[r]econsideration 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." Id. (citing U.S. Aviation Underwriters v. Wesair, LLC, No. 8-00891, 2010 WL 1462707 (D. Nev. April 12, 2010)) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).
ACCORDINGLY, and for good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that Mr. Qazi's Motion for Reconsideration (#62) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Qazi's Motion for Reconsideration (#63) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Qazi's Motion for Reconsideration (#64) is DENIED.
