Christopher Perez v. Cpl. Beck, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California construed Christopher Perez’s objections to findings and recommendations as a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend the judgment. The court denied reconsideration because Perez identified no newly discovered evidence, clear error, or intervening change in controlling law, and ordered that the action remain closed.

Holdings

1. The court construed Plaintiff's post-judgment objections as a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
2. Reconsideration was denied because Plaintiff identified no newly discovered evidence, clear error, or intervening change in controlling law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's late-filed objections should be construed as a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
2. Whether Plaintiff established grounds for altering or amending the judgment based on newly discovered evidence, clear error, or an intervening change in controlling law.

Disposition

dismissed