1 Approximately three (3) weeks after the transfer of his Petition, Larose notified the

Court that he had been transferred to the York County Prison. See Rec Doc. 10.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EMMANUEL LAROSE, :

:

Petitioner :

:

v. : CIVIL NO. 4:CV-05-0931

:

ALBERTO GONZALES, et al. : (Judge Jones)

:

Respondents :

ORDER

November 16, 2005

 

Background

On May 6, 2005, Emmanuel Larose (“Petitioner” or “Larose”) filed this pro

se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 while detained at

the Plaquemines Parish Detention Center, in Braithwaite, Louisiana.1

 Named as

Respondents were Secretary Alberto Gonzales of the Department of Homeland

Security and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). 

Petitioner stated that he is a native of Haiti who is being detained by the ICE

pending his deportation. His Petition challenged his pending removal on the grounds

that he did not commit an aggravated felony and his rights under the provisions of the

Case 4:05-cv-00931-JEJ-JVW Document 11 Filed 11/16/05 Page 1 of 4
2

Convention Against Torture (CAT) have been violated. He also sought an emergency

stay of deportation. 

By Memorandum and Order dated May 10, 2005, this Court granted

Petitioner temporary in forma pauperis status, a temporary stay of deportation, and

transferred his Petition to the United States District Court for the Western District of

Louisiana pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Presently pending before the Court are

Petitioner’s motions seeking reconsideration. See Rec. Docs. 8 & 9.

Discussion

A motion for reconsideration is a device of limited utility. It may be used

only to seek remediation of manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly

discovered precedent or evidence which, if discovered previously, might have affected

the court's decision. Harsco Corp. v. Zlotnicki, 779 F.2d 906 (3d Cir. 1985), cert.

denied, 476 U.S. 1171 (1986). 

It has also been held that a motion for reconsideration is appropriate in

instances such as where the court has " . . . misunderstood a party, or has made a

decision outside the adversarial issues presented to the court by parties, or has made

an error not of reasoning, but of apprehension." See Rohrbach v. AT & T Nassau

Metals Corp., 902 F. Supp. 523, 527 (M.D. Pa. 1995), vacated in part on other

grounds on reconsideration, 915 F. Supp. 712 (M.D. Pa. 1996) (quoting Above the

Belt, Inc. v. Mel Bohannan Roofing, Inc., 99 F.R.D. 99, 101 (E.D. Va. 1983)). 

Case 4:05-cv-00931-JEJ-JVW Document 11 Filed 11/16/05 Page 2 of 4
2 Section 106 amended section 242(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to

provide that the sole and exclusive means to review an order of removal shall be by petition for

review in the applicable court of appeals. H.R. 1268, 109th Cong. (2005)(enacted), Pub.L.No. 109-

13, Div.B, 119 Stat. 231. 

3

"Because federal courts have a strong interest in the finality of judgments, motions for

reconsideration should be granted sparingly." Continental Casualty Co. v. Diversified

Indus., Inc., 884 F. Supp. 937, 943 (E.D. Pa. 1995). 

Larose’s reconsideration motions do not present any facts or arguments

which would undermine this Court’s prior determination that it lacked jurisdiction

over the Warden of the Plaquemines Parish Detention Center and that jurisdiction for

Petitioner’s action rested solely with the district court having jurisdiction over his

custodian. It is additionally noted that this Court now lacks jurisdiction over

Petitioner’s claims under Section 106 of the REAL ID Act of 20052

 which became

effective on May 11, 2005. Since Larose’s reconsideration motions fail to establish

the presence of any errors of law or fact and do not set forth any newly discovered

evidence or precedent, they will be denied. 

Case 4:05-cv-00931-JEJ-JVW Document 11 Filed 11/16/05 Page 3 of 4
4

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Petitioner’s Motions for Reconsideration (docs. 8 & 9) are DENIED.

s/ John E. Jones III

JOHN E. JONES III

United States District Judge

Case 4:05-cv-00931-JEJ-JVW Document 11 Filed 11/16/05 Page 4 of 4