Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06945/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06945-3/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY ADAM ELIZALDI, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

SCOTT P. RAWERS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:03-cv-06945-TAG HC 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

(Doc. 38) 

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), the parties consented to the

jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge. 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On March 29, 2007, the Court issued an order denying the amended petition on the

merits. (Doc. 26). Judgment was entered against Petitioner and in favor of Respondent on that

same date. (Doc. 27). Subsequently, Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of the

Magistrate Judge’s order (Doc. 28), which was a final order because all parties had previously

consented to the Magistrate Judge’s jurisdiction and the District Judge had issued an order

referring the case to the Magistrate Judge for all purposes. (Doc. 19). On September 19, 2007,

the Court denied Petitioner’s motion, concluding that it presented no newly discovered facts but,

instead, merely re-argued the issues previously raised by Petitioner and ruled upon by the Court. 

(Doc. 37). Almost immediately, on October 15, 2007, Petitioner filed the instant motion for

reconsideration. (Doc. 38). Like the previous motion, this motion for reconsideration attempts

Case 1:03-cv-06945-TAG Document 42 Filed 08/07/08 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

to point out defects in the Court’s legal analysis, questions the Court’s reliance on certain legal

precedents, and insists that the Court ignored key facts in the record; however, it does not present

any newly discovered facts.

DISCUSSION

When filing a motion for reconsideration, Local Rule 78-230(k) requires a party to set

forth new or different facts or circumstances claimed to exist which did not exist or were not

shown upon such prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion. Local Rule

78-230(k)(3). 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. School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County,

Or. v. AcandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). The United States Court of Appeals for

the Ninth Circuit has indicated that the “overwhelming weight of authority is that the failure to

file documents in an original motion or opposition does not turn the late filed documents into

“newly discovered evidence.” Id. (Citing Waltman v. International Paper Co., 875 F.2d 468,

473-474 (5th Cir. 1989); Trentacosta v. Frontier Pac. Aircraft Indus., Inc., 813 F.2d 1553, 1557

& n. 4 (9th Cir. 1987); Frederick S. Wyle Professional Corp. v. Texaco, Inc., 764 F.2d 604, 609

(9th Cir. 1985)). 

Here, as mentioned, Petitioner has presented no newly discovered facts or circumstances

to warrant reconsideration. Nor is the Court of the opinion that the Court committed “clear

error” in its order denying the Petitioner or that its decision is manifestly unjust. Further, the

Court is unaware of any change in controlling law that would affect the Court’s decision. Thus,

no basis exists to grant Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.

ORDER

Based on the foregoing, Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 38) is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 7, 2008 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:03-cv-06945-TAG Document 42 Filed 08/07/08 Page 2 of 2