Rodney Jackson v. Sodexo, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA RODNEY JACKSON, Plaintiff, 8:25CV369 vs. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SODEXO, Inc.; Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on a motion filed by Plaintiff on December 10, 2025, which he captions as a “Motion to Appeal” and in which he states the following in support of his motion: “Plaintiff do believe that if his complaint has been handled in a proper manner that my job wouldn’t ended. I respectfully ask this court to reopen my case.” Filing No. 13 (as in original). The Court dismissed this case without prejudice on December 3, 2025, finding Plaintiff’s pleadings failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Filing Nos. 11 & 12. Upon consideration, the Court liberally construes Plaintiff’s motion as one to alter or amend the Court’s judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and will deny the motion as Plaintiff has not demonstrated he is entitled to such relief.

Rule 59(e) motions serve the limited function of correcting manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence. Akpovi v. Douglas, 43 F.4th 832, 837 (8th Cir. 2022). Such motions cannot be used to introduce new evidence, tender new legal theories, or raise arguments which could have been offered or raised prior to entry of judgment. Id. Here, Plaintiff makes only a barebones request for the Court to reopen this case and does not offer any legitimate reason for altering, amending, or otherwise obtaining any relief from the Court’s judgment of dismissal.

Because Plaintiff captioned his motion as a “Motion to Appeal,” it is possible that Plaintiff may want to appeal the Court’s judgment of dismissal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. However, as Plaintiff specifically asked this Court to “reopen” his case, the Court has construed his motion as a Rule 59(e) motion and ruled accordingly. If Plaintiff wishes to file an appeal to the Court of Appeals, then he may do so by filing a notice of appeal in this Court in accordance with Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(a)(1) (‘An appeal permitted by law as of right from a district court to a court of appeals may be taken only by filing a notice of appeal with the district clerk within the time allowed by Rule 4.”); Fed. R. App. 4(a)(1)(A), (4)(A) (notice of appeal “must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from” and, if a party files a timely motion under Rule 59(e), “the time to file an appeal runs... from the entry of the order disposing of the .. . motion.”).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiffs motion, Filing No. 13, construed as a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment, is denied.

Dated this 12th day of December, 2025.

BY THE y M. Hx enior United States District Judge