(PS) Wooten v. The State of California

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ROBERT WOOTEN, No. 2:22-cv-00850 TLN CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 This action was dismissed with prejudice on August 16, 2022. (ECF Nos. 7 & 8.) Before the court is plaintiff’s September 2, 2022 motion to set aside the judgment. (ECF No. 9.)

19 A district court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). “Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Id. at 1263.

24 Here, plaintiff has not shown that reconsideration of the judgment is warranted. The court’s decision to dismiss this action with prejudice was not clearly erroneous nor manifestly unjust, and none of the other factors apply. Plaintiff’s motion lacks merit and will be denied.

27 //// //// ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to set aside the judgment | (ECF No. 9) is denied.

3 | Dated: October 4, 2022 Card ht fa he 4 CAROLYN K.DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE || 2/vooten0850.R60 1]