Filed: Jul. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 19, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING POST-JUDGMENT MOTIONS (ECF NOS. 84, 85) MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . In this action, on June 24, 2019, the Court denied Mathew Lee Williams's amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus and denied Williams a certificate of appealability (ECF No. 81), and judgment was entered accordingly (ECF No. 82). On July 3, 2019, Williams filed a motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 85) and a motion for stay and abeyance (ECF No. 84). Respondents filed an opposition to the motion for
Summary: ORDER DENYING POST-JUDGMENT MOTIONS (ECF NOS. 84, 85) MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . In this action, on June 24, 2019, the Court denied Mathew Lee Williams's amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus and denied Williams a certificate of appealability (ECF No. 81), and judgment was entered accordingly (ECF No. 82). On July 3, 2019, Williams filed a motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 85) and a motion for stay and abeyance (ECF No. 84). Respondents filed an opposition to the motion for r..
More
ORDER DENYING POST-JUDGMENT MOTIONS (ECF NOS. 84, 85)
MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.
In this action, on June 24, 2019, the Court denied Mathew Lee Williams's amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus and denied Williams a certificate of appealability (ECF No. 81), and judgment was entered accordingly (ECF No. 82).
On July 3, 2019, Williams filed a motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 85) and a motion for stay and abeyance (ECF No. 84). Respondents filed an opposition to the motion for reconsideration on July 8, 2019 (ECF No. 86), and Williams replied on July 17, 2019 (ECF No. 87).
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), a court may relieve a party from a final judgment if there is a showing of: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence; (3) fraud; (4) a void judgment; (5) a satisfied or discharged judgment; or (6) any other reason justifying relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Williams does not make a showing warranting relief under Rule 60(b). That motion will be denied.
The denial of the motion for reconsideration renders moot the motion for stay and abeyance. And, at any rate, the Court has examined the motion for stay and abeyance and determines that it is without merit.
It is therefore ordered that Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 85) and Motion for Stay and Abeyance (ECF No. 84) are denied.
