Case ID: f-appx_470/html/0546-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Nehemiah ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. CATLETT, Sergeant; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 10-56885.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 21, 2012.
    
    Filed Feb. 29, 2012.
    
      Nehemiah Robinson, Corcoran, CA, pro se.
    Misha Igra, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, Sylvie Snyder, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, AND BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Nehemiah Robinson appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants delayed assigning him to a lower bunk, confiscated his cane, denied him pain medication, and retaliated against him. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Nunes v. Ashcroft, 375 F.3d 805, 807 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Robinson’s post-judgment motion because Robinson failed to show any newly discovered evidence, intervening change in controlling law, clear error, or manifest injustice. See id. at 807-OS (setting forth grounds justifying reconsideration).

Robinson’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.