Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-07134/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-07134-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David Lucas
Plaintiff
Terry Raybon
Defendant

Document Text:

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID LUCAS,

Plaintiff,

v.

TERRY RAYBON,

Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-07134-EMC 

ORDER DENYING POST-JUDGMENT 

MOTION

Docket No. 15

Plaintiff, an Alabama prisoner, filed this action to obtain pre-action discovery under 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27 from Facebook and a yet-to-be-determined tech firm to learn 

information so he could file suit in an Alabama state or federal court. This Court dismissed the 

action because it was filed in the wrong venue, and noted that the dismissal was without prejudice 

to plaintiff filing a new action in the appropriate district court in Alabama (where there appeared 

to be two districts that might be appropriate). Plaintiff has filed a motion to alter, amend, or 

vacate the judgment, saying that he would like the Court to reopen the action to transfer it to the 

Middle District of Alabama because he “lack[s] funds and resources to duplicate the motions

already before the court for the Middle District of Alabama.” Docket No. 15. 

A party may move to alter or amend a judgment in a motion filed no later than 28 days 

after entry of judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). A motion for reconsideration under Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) “‘should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, 

unless the district court is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if 

there is an intervening change in the law.’” McDowell v. Calderon, 197 F.3d 1253, 1255 (9th Cir. 

1999) (citation omitted) (en banc). Mr. Negrete has not shown newly discovered evidence, clear 

Case 3:18-cv-07134-EMC Document 16 Filed 04/25/19 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

error by the Court, or an intervening change in the law. His motion to alter, amend, or vacate the 

judgment therefore is DENIED. Docket No. 15. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 25, 2019

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:18-cv-07134-EMC Document 16 Filed 04/25/19 Page 2 of 2