Free Order on Motion for New Trial - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 City of Chandler, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendants filed a response to Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. Because the Court did not authorize this filing, Defendants' response (Doc. # 187) will be stricken from the record. See LRCiv. 7.2(g)(2) ("No response to a motion for reconsideration and no reply to the response may be filed unless ordered by the Court . . . ."). The Court did not consider Defendants' response in ruling on the motion.
Case 2:03-cv-00249-JAT Document 188 Filed 05/28/2008 Page 1 of 2
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Dible, et al., Plaintiffs, vs.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV 03-249-PHX-JAT ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' "Motion for New Trial on Amended Judgment." No trial has been held in this case. In substance Plaintiffs seek reconsideration of this Court's April 29, 2008 order granting Defendants' motion to correct the record (Doc. # 184). The Court therefore construes this motion as a motion for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).1 In their motion, Plaintiffs simply restate the arguments this Court has already considered and rejected in ruling on Defendants' motion to correct the record. This is not a proper basis for reconsideration. LRCiv. 7.2(g)(1); Fuller v. M.G. Jewelry, 950 F.2d 1437, 1442 (9th Cir. 1991).

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

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs' "Motion for New Trial on Amended Judgment" (Doc. # 186) is DENIED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED striking Defendants' response to this motion (Doc. # 187). DATED this 28th day of May, 2008.

-2Case 2:03-cv-00249-JAT Document 188 Filed 05/28/2008 Page 2 of 2