UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

JOEL LASSITER, ) Case No. 4:25-cv-1683 ) Plaintiff, ) Judge J. Philip Calabrese ) v. ) Magistrate Judge ) Jennifer Dowdell Armstrong STATE OF OHIO, ) ) Defendant. ) )

OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Joel Lassiter, an inmate at the Northeast Ohio Correctional Center in Youngstown, Ohio, filed a pro se lawsuit against the State of Ohio relating to medical care he received. On October 31, 2025, the Court dismissed his complaint. Mr. Lassiter filed a motion for reconsideration under Rule 59. Under Rule 59, a court may alter or amend the judgment where there is a clear error of law, newly discovered evidence, or an intervening change in controlling law or to prevent manifest injustice. GenCorp, Inc. v. American Int’l Underwriters,

(6th Cir. 1999) (citations omitted). Such relief constitutes an extraordinary remedy reserved for exceptional cases. Hines v. Commissioner of Soc. Sec.,

, 1081 (S.D. Ohio 2019) (citations omitted). It is not an opportunity to re-argue matters or “to raise arguments which could, and should, have been made before judgment issued.” Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Engler,

, 374 (6th Cir. 1998) (quoting Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. World Univ. Inc.,

(1st Cir. 1992)). Justifying reconsideration requires a moving party to: (1) demonstrate an intervening change in the controlling law; (2) establish that new evidence is available; or (3) prove that a clear error occurred or reconsideration is necessary to prevent manifest injustice. See Louisvuille/Jefferson Cnty. Metro. Gov't v. Hotels.com, L.P.,

(6th Cir. 2009). A district court retains the discretion to entertain such a motion. Rodriguez v. Tennessee Laborers Health & Welfare Fund,

, 959 n.7 (6th Cir. 2004). In his motion, Plaintiff confirms that he brings suit based, at least in part, on the medical care he received (or was not provided to him). (ECF No. 8, PageID #26.) He cites statutes and cases relating to disability discrimination against inmates. The Court already addressed these issues in its ruling dismissing his lawsuit. (See ECF No. 6, PageID #21—-22.) Upon review of the complaint, and Plaintiffs motion, the Court remains of the view that Plaintiff fails to state a claim. Therefore, the Court DENIES the motion for reconsideration. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 13, 2025

J. Philip Calabrese United States District Judge Northern District of Ohio