Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02105/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02105-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael Scott Jones
Petitioner
Jose Solis
Respondent

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL SCOTT JONES,

Petitioner,

 v.

JOSE SOLIS, Warden,

Respondent. /

No. C 04-02105 JSW

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

Now before the Court is the motion for reconsideration filed by Petitioner Michael

Scott Jones. The motion is improperly filed. First, no party may notice a motion for

reconsideration without first obtaining leave of Court to file the motion. Civil L.R. 7-9(a). 

Second, the Court may grant leave to file a motion for reconsideration of any interlocutory

order, before the entry of judgment. Id. Petitioner impermissibly seeks reconsideration of a

final judgment adjudicating all of the claims and the rights and liabilities of the parties in this

matter. Lastly, a motion for reconsideration may be made on one of three grounds: (1) a

material difference in fact or law exists from that which was presented to the Court, which, in

the exercise of reasonable diligence, the party applying for reconsideration did not know at

the time of the order; (2) the emergence of new material facts or a change of law; or (3) a

manifest failure by the Court to consider material facts or dispositive legal arguments

presented before entry of the order. Civil L.R. 7-9(b)(1)-(3). The moving party may not

reargue any written or oral argument previously asserted to the Court. Civil L.R. 7-9(c). 

Case 3:04-cv-02105-JSW Document 26 Filed 05/10/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 Counsel for Petitioner should also be aware that, notwithstanding the length of his

submissions to this Court, he should diligently comply with General Order 45, VI. G, as well

as this Court’s Standing Order ¶ 4. Both orders require that in addition to filing papers

electronically or manually, the parties are required to lodge for chambers a paper copy of any

document filed no later than noon on the following business day.

2

Petitioner’s motion is procedurally improper both because he filed to seek leave of Court

to file the motion and because it seeks reconsideration of a final judgment. Further, the

arguments contained in the motion were previously asserted to the Court and considered. On

these bases, the motion is DENIED.1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 10, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-02105-JSW Document 26 Filed 05/10/06 Page 2 of 2