Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02137/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02137-3/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

TERRY JOE BURTON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2137 FCD KJM P

vs.

HDSP MAIL ROOM STAFF, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On October 10, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion asking that this court vacate

judgment entered on September 21, 2006. 

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.

Plaintiff does not present newly discovered evidence. Furthermore, the court

finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the September 21, 2006 order adopting the April

21, 2006 findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge is neither manifestly unjust nor

clearly erroneous. 

Case 2:05-cv-02137-FCD-KJM Document 10 Filed 10/13/06 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s October 10, 2006 motion

to vacate judgment is denied. 

DATED:October 13, 2006

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-02137-FCD-KJM Document 10 Filed 10/13/06 Page 2 of 2