Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03655/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03655-14/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JANE DOE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WILLITS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant. /

No. C 09-03655 JSW

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

Now before the Court is the motion filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe for leave to file a motion

for reconsideration of this Court’s order dated May 27, 2010 granting Defendant Willits Unified

School District’s motion for summary judgment. Having carefully considered the motion and

the relevant legal authority, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a

motion for reconsideration. 

A motion for reconsideration may be made on one of three grounds: (1) a material

difference in fact or law exists from that which was presented to the Court, which, in the

exercise of reasonable diligence, the party applying for reconsideration did not know at the time

of the order; (2) the emergence of new material facts or a change of law; or (3) a manifest

failure by the Court to consider material facts or dispositive legal arguments presented before

entry of the order. Civ. L.R. 7-9(b)(1)-(3). In addition, the moving party may not reargue any

written or oral argument previously asserted to the Court. Civ. L.R. 7-9(c). 

Plaintiff moves for reconsideration for the Court to consider dispositive legal arguments

and factual considerations that she alleges the Court failed to consider initially with regard to

Case 3:09-cv-03655-JSW Document 111 Filed 06/11/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 motion. The Court considered the arguments now raised when considering Plaintiff’s

opposition to the motion for summary judgment and found them unpersuasive. The Court finds

the same legal and factual arguments similarly unpersuasive in the context of the motion to

reconsider. Plaintiff may not move for reconsideration on the basis of any written or oral

argument previously asserted to the Court. Civ. L.R. 7-9(c). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion

for leave to file a motion for reconsideration is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 11, 2010 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-03655-JSW Document 111 Filed 06/11/10 Page 2 of 2