Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00565/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00565-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM HENRY PRICE,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-0565 LKK KJM P

vs.

JOHN C. MARSHALL, et al.,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

On September 3, 2009, petitioner filed a motion asking that this court reconsider

its July 30, 2007 order adopting the magistrate judge’s May 2, 2007 findings and

recommendations thereby dismissing this action. 

A district court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5

F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). “Reconsideration 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. at 1263.

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00565-LKK -KJM Document 59 Filed 04/23/10 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

Plaintiff does not present newly discovered evidence suggesting this matter should

not have been dismissed. Furthermore, the court finds that, after a de novo review of this case,

the July 30, 2007 order adopting the May 2, 2007 findings and recommendations is neither

manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s September 3, 2009

“motion for relief from judgment” is denied. 

DATED: April 23, 2010.

Case 2:06-cv-00565-LKK -KJM Document 59 Filed 04/23/10 Page 2 of 2