Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-02231/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-02231-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JENNIFER ALLAN, )

) NO. CV S-01-2231 GEB GGH

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) 

) ORDER

CITY OF MARYSVILLE, et al., ) 

)

Defendants. )

)

On July 1, 2005, Defendants Sean Roberts, Kelly Fisher, and

William McPherson filed an “Application and/or Motion for

Reconsideration of June 13, 2005, Order by District Judge Burrell

Denying Motions for Attorney’s Fees and Sanctions.”

A motion for reconsideration “should not be granted, absent

highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is presented

with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is

an intervening change in the controlling law.” 389 Orange St.

Partners v. Arnold, 179 F.3d 656, 665 (9th Cir. 1999)(citing School

Dist. No. 1J v. AC&S, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993)). 

Further, Local Rule 78-230 requires the movant to set forth

Case 2:01-cv-02231-GEB -KJM Document 293 Filed 07/08/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

the material facts and circumstances surrounding

each motion for which reconsideration is sought,

including:

***

(3) what new or different facts or circumstances

are claimed to exist which did not exist or were

not shown upon such prior motion, or what other

grounds exist for the motion, and

(4) why the facts or circumstances were not shown

at the time of the prior motion.

Although Defendants argue in a conclusory manner that the

Court committed clear error in its previous ruling, they have

presented no persuasive grounds to justify reconsideration of the

ruling.

Since Defendants have not shown that reconsideration is

justified, the motion is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 7, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:01-cv-02231-GEB -KJM Document 293 Filed 07/08/05 Page 2 of 2