Jaime Cesar Gonzalez v. Akhavan, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied Jaime Cesar Gonzalez’s motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice. The court held that Gonzalez had not shown an intervening change in law, newly discovered evidence, clear error, manifest injustice, or other grounds warranting relief under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b).

Holdings

1. Reconsideration of a final judgment is appropriate under Rule 59(e) only upon an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, or the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice; Rule 60(b) provides the specified grounds for relief from a final order or judgment, and Local Rule 230(j) requires identification of new or different facts or other grounds for reconsideration.
2. Plaintiff was not entitled to reconsideration because he did not show new or different facts that could not have been presented earlier or any other ground warranting relief from the judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff established a basis under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to reconsider the judgment dismissing the action without prejudice.
2. Whether Plaintiff established a basis under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) or Eastern District of California Local Rule 230(j) for relief from the final judgment.
3. Whether Plaintiff's claim that prison authorities withheld information identifying the defendants warranted reconsideration or additional time to effect service.

Disposition

other