Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01983/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01983-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

MARVELLOUS A. GREENE, SR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1983 FCD KJM P

vs.

CASTRO, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On April 18, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion asking that this court vacate its April 4,

2007 order adopting the magistrate judge’s August 29, 2006 findings and recommendations

thereby dismissing defendant Fleischman from 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 2:04-cv-01983-FCD-KJM Document 23 Filed 10/30/07 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. Furthermore, the court

finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the April 4, 2007 order adopting the August 29,

2006 findings and recommendations is neither manifestly unjust nor clearly erroneous. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s April 18, 2007 motion

for reconsideration is denied. 

DATED: October 30, 2007.

Case 2:04-cv-01983-FCD-KJM Document 23 Filed 10/30/07 Page 2 of 2