UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND ) KARA BILLER, as Attorney-in-Fact ) for JOAN M. MCKENNA; and JOAN } M. MCKENNA, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) S-H OPCO GREENWICH BAY ) MANOR, LLC, a/k/a BROOKSDALE ) C.A. No, 19-233-JJM-PAS GREENWICH BAY; BROOKDALE ) SENIOR LIVING COMMUNTIIES, } INC., a/k/a BROOKDALE SENIOR ) LIVING, INC.; BKD HB ACQUISTION ) SUB, INC.; BKD TWENTY-ONE ) MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC. ) and S-H TWENTY-ONE OPCO,INC., ) Defendant. ) es)

ORDER Defendants’ Rule 59(e) Motion to Alter or Amend this Court’s July 17, 2019 Order in Light of Newly Discovered Evidence (ECF No. 15) is DENIED. The “newly discovered evidence” to which the Defendants’ refer was within their custody and they had access toit at all times. A court should “deny a motion for reconsideration based on the ‘new evidence’ exception if that evidence ‘in the exercise of due diligencel| could have been presented earlier” Emmanuel v. Int? Broth. of Teamsters, Local Union No. 25,

(1st Cir. 2005). “[A] district court does not abuse its discretion by denying a motion for reconsideration grounded on the discovery of evidence that, in the exercise of due diligence, could have been presented earlier.” /d (citing Hayes

v. Douglas Dynamics, Inc.,

, 91 n. 1 (1st Cir. 1993)). Such is the case here, and so the Court DENIES Defendants’ Motion to Alter. ECF No. 15.

ITISS 4 ( f | : John J. McConnell, Jr. United States District Judge August 22, 2019