Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01593/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01593-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

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

WO

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Matthew D. Diamond; Susan E. Diamond,

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

One West Bank, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-1593-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration (doc. 69) of our Order

dated April 29, 2010 (doc. 61). Specifically, plaintiffs ask us to reconsider our conclusion

that Susan Diamond does not have standing to assert Counts 2 through 7 in the Complaint.

Under LRCiv 7.2(g)(2), absent good cause shown, a motion for reconsideration must

be filed no later than 14 days after the filing date of the Order that is the subject of the

motion. Plaintiffs’ motion, filed on June 16, 2010, is well outside this filing deadline.

For cause, plaintiffs assert that they were awaiting our ruling on their first motion for

reconsideration on an entirely separate issue. They assert that they did not want to

“bombard” us with another motion at that time. Clearly, this fails to establish cause.

Plaintiff Matthew Diamond also contends that he underwent surgery after our ruling on their

first motion for reconsideration, but the 14 day deadline had already passed by that time.

Finally, plaintiffs contend that new facts have been discovered since the filing deadline

Case 2:09-cv-01593-FJM Document 72 Filed 07/06/10 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

27

28

- 2 -

expired. But instead plaintiffs merely reassert arguments that we have already rejected.

Susan Diamond’s community interest in the property does not alter her standing to assert the

dismissed claims.

IT IS ORDERED DENYING the motion for reconsideration (doc. 69).

DATED this 2nd day of July, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01593-FJM Document 72 Filed 07/06/10 Page 2 of 2